Model-Driven Systems Engineeringfor Virtual Product Design

Manuela Dalibor, Nico Jansen, Bernhard Rumpe, Louis Wachtmeister, Andreas WortmannSoftware Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, http://www.se-rwth.de/

Abstract—Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) aimsto provide a systems engineering methodology that leveragesmodeling methods to support design, analysis, verification, andvalidation of systems. As such, methodologies for MBSE haveto be able to integrate heterogeneous engineering models froma variety of domains, including mechanical engineering, productdesign, legislation, and many more. Most research in this areausually only focuses on general system descriptions of a step inthe system development process, without providing any interdis-ciplinary or interprocess connections. Thus, the models createdby the domain experts are often unconnected and not suitedfor automated model transformations. We present a method tointegrate abstract system descriptions in the Systems ModelingLanguage (SysML) with Computer-Aided Design (CAD) models,which are not only the primary model for geometrical hardwaredescriptions but also the starting point of most process chains inthe context of virtual product development. The transformationsof our method are realized in a plug-in for the MagicDrawmodeling environment and support to generate parameters ofa parameter and constraint CAD modeling approach from aSysML model. This automates the integration of abstract systemdescriptions with design models to foster a coherent virtualproduct development.

Index Terms—Model-Driven Systems Engineering, SysML,CAD, Tool Integration

I. INTRODUCTION

The engineering of cyber-physical systems demands theinterdisciplinary collaboration of experts from a variety ofdifferent domains, including mechanical engineering, productdesign, legislation, etc. to produce software artifacts. However,these are rarely software engineering experts and, hence, needto overcome the conceptual gap [1] between their domain ofexpertise and software development. Modeling languages [2]can reduce this gap by using syntax and semantics closerto the domain of interest than to computer programming.Consequently, research and industry are increasingly turningto Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) to leveragemodels for the description of systems, communication, anddiscussion of designs, and exchange between experts. Whileyielding advantages over “traditional” document-based sys-tems engineering, praxis has shown the established use ofmodels in MBSE usually is too vague to leverage theirpotential for automation [3].

In systems engineering, software, and hardware componentsare often produced in parallel. Errors detected during their

This research has partly received funding from the German ResearchFoundation (DFG) under grant no. EXC 2023 / 390621612. The responsibilityfor the content of this publication is with the authors.

D d v2

p1p2

ρρ ρv1

Fig. 1: A conceptual sketch of a Venturi nozzle showing themost important flow parameters for the velocity, pressure, anddensity

integration, hence, are more costly than errors detected ear-lier. To overcome this problem, virtual product developmentdescribes a practice to support all phases of the productdevelopment process using a digital environment [4]. Forthis aim, it applies computer-aided modeling methods inall development-relevant phases of the product life-cycle tosimulate, verify, validate, and manufacture the product whileminimizing the creation of physical prototypes. The virtualdevelopment process comprises three activities: (1) Develop-ment of a virtual product design that describes the geometryof hardware elements using 2D or 3D geometric modelingenvironments e.g., by creating CAD models in a CAD suite.(2) Virtual product simulation, which analyses the product in asimulation environment; and (3) Virtual manufacturing createsthe actual hardware product.

While the connection between the virtual product design,analysis, and digital manufacturing is a research topic in clas-sical mechanical engineering [4], [5], the integration betweenabstract artifacts created in MBSE often is underexploredthere. Therefore, we present a small Model-Driven SystemsEngineering (MDSE) methodology that aims to integratethe functional SysML paradigm with the geometric CADparadigm. Our contribution, therefore, is

- a process to integrate SysML models in a virtual productdevelopment environment,

- modeling methods to support this process,- and a tool to implement the SysML-CAD connection of

this process.

In the following, Sec. II introduces a typical examplefrom mechanical engineering. Afterwards, Sec. III introducesMDSE and virtual product development. Then, Sec. IV intro-duces a method for virtual product design that uses processchains to integrate SysML models with CAD models. Sec. Vdescribes how to apply newly developed and existing tools

http://www.se-rwth.de/

to our application example to create a virtual product design.Finally, Sec. VI discusses observations, Sec. VII highlightsrelated work, and Sec. VIII concludes.

II. EXAMPLE

Consider the development of a Venturi nozzle that servesas vacuum creator in the pneumatic system of an industrialrobot. This robot uses its pneumatic system to operate suctioncups for pick and place operations.

Fig. 1 shows a concept drawing and the primary modelparameters that are required to perform first mathematicalanalyses and describe the essential physical principles. Nozzlesof this kind can serve as vacuum creators since the Venturieffect causes that the static pressure p1 at the inlet sectionof the nozzle with diameter D decreases to p2 when thetube diameter is decreased to d. At the same time, the flowspeed v1 increases to v2. To simplify the simulations and thedefinition we further assume that the flow is incompressible,which means that the density ρ stays constant in all parts ofthe nozzle.

Even though this simple mechanical component has nocomplex interactions with software or electrical parts, themodels to describe, simulate, and manufacture this componentare surprisingly diverse and complicated. The main challengeof this example is that these various models are usuallycreated by different engineers of heterogeneous domains, usingmultiple modeling tools and techniques. For systems, such asthe pick-and-place robot, often SysML models are used todescribe an abstract view of this system.

Based on this description, CAD models have to be createdto describe the hardware design in a graphical 2D or 3Denvironment. Hence, in addition to the heterogeneity of themodels, also the model creation tools that are used in differentengineering domains are heterogeneous.

Thus, many engineers of different domains use variousmodeling tools to create multiple model-views on differentabstraction levels. While mechanical engineers mostly useCAD modeling tools such as PTC Creo, CATIA, or AutodeskInventor, visual modeling tools for software and systemssuch as PTC Modeler, Enterprise Architect, or NoMagic’sMagicDraw are often used by software and systems engineersto describe abstract system designs. For that reason, it becomesnecessary to exchange parameters between these differentmodeling tools to distribute (and validate) the informationamong various domain experts.

We present a method to exchange important model pa-rameters such as dimensions between a MagicDraw SysMLmodel and Autodesk Inventor CAD model. Additionally, weuse this CAD model to simulate the behavior of the systemand produce a hardware prototype.

III. PRELIMINARIES

Our method for MDSE aims to facilitate consistency check-ing between functional SysML models and geometric CADmodels by enabling bidirectional transformations between both

SysML Modeling

CAD Modeling

CAE Analysis

CAM Modeling

act CAx Process

CAD

parameters

model

information

CAD

model

CAE

results

[re

qu

irem

ents

un

sa

tisfied]

[no

t m

an

ufa

ctu

rable

]

[else]

[else]

object flow

control flow merge node

decision node

activity

Fig. 2: An iterative system development process that usesSysML as starting point to enable CAx process activities

paradigms. There are various definitions for systems engineer-ing [6]–[9]. Some emphasize its focus on a whole systemin contrast to its parts [6], whereas others describe it as aniterative top-down process that aims at developing a systemthat fulfills all requirements [7], or as an interdisciplinaryapproach for developing successful systems [8]. Model-BasedSystems Engineering (MBSE) is a novel paradigm of sys-tems engineering that applies formalized modeling principles,methods, languages, and tools to the entire life-cycle of com-plex systems [10]. In contrast to traditional document-basedengineering, in MBSE models are the primary developmentartifacts. Such models can use domain terminology the expertsare familiar with. They are more abstract than documents tofacilitate reuse, and more formal to enable automated analysisand consistency checking. Model-Driven Systems Engineering(MDSE) even extends the idea of MBSE and aims at automat-ing parts of the development process leveraging models. Toachieve this aim, models of a MDSE methodology must notonly be the key artifacts of the engineering process but alsosufficient to generate (e.g., by model refinement or transfor-mation) other descriptions that address system requirements,design, analysis, verification, and validation activities.

The OMG Systems Modeling Language (SysML) [11] hasbecome a de-facto standard for specifying system parts inthe development process [12], [13]. SysML is a graphicalmodeling language that enables engineers to model the systemarchitecture and facilitates the application of MBSE, e.g.,by supporting engineers in defining the system structure,dependencies between system parts, the system behavior, andconnecting these with requirements.

SysML is a subset of the Unified Modeling Language(UML) [14] extended with functionality for systems engineer-ing that is realized as a graphical modeling language. It enables

≪stereotype≫

Block

[Class]

CD

≪stereotype≫

CAD Element

[Class]

existing SysML stereotypes

new CAD specific stereotypes

≪stereotype≫

ValueProperty

[Class]

≪stereotype≫

CAD Parameter

[Class]

Fig. 3: The CAD profile extension that includes «CAD Ele-ment» and «CAD Parameter» into SysML

engineers to model the system architecture and behavior andfacilitates the application of MBSE, e.g., by supporting theintegration of structure with behavior and constraints. Hence,the SysML features four diagram types: (1) Structure: BlockDefinition Diagrams (BDDs), Internal Block Diagrams (IBDs),and Package Diagrams; (2) Behaviour: SysML provides Se-quence Diagrams, State Machines, and Activity Diagrams;(3) Parametrics (constraints): parametric diagrams to specifyphysical properties and dependencies between parameters; and(4) Requirements: diagrams that provide a graphical notationto capture requirements of a system.

The Computer-Aided x (CAx) paradigm describes variouscomputer-aided methods, which enable system engineers todefine concrete products in their respective engineering do-main. Typical CAx models are for example, CAD, Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE), and Computer-Aided Manufac-turing (CAM) models. Because CAD models describe thegeometry and design of a product, they are the main artifact ofa virtual product design process. Based on the CAD model, theCAE models analyze the product design concerning differentengineering analysis criteria by using simulation methodssuch as Finite Element Method, Computional Fluid Dynamics(CFD), or Multibody Dynamics. Because simulations arethe primary methods that engineers use in this context, theCAE analysis is strongly connected with the virtual productsimulation. Finally, the CAM summarizes all computer-aidedmethods that are usable to manufacture the product and isrelated with digital manufacturing activities.

The combination of CAD, CAE, and CAM in the context ofvirtual product development leads to the so-called CAx processchains. A CAx process chain is a modeling or programmingmethod to build a digital representation, to calculate visual-izations, analyses, simulations, optimizations, or control data[5]. In these process chains, the CAD model has an importantrole, since it provides the digital hardware descriptions, whichserve as the base of the data transformations that the CAxprocess chain performs.

IV. MODELING PROCESS AND METHODS

In order to combine the advantages of a MDSE approachwith the benefits of virtual product development, this sectionaims to introduce a development process based on processchains and describes methods to implement this process.

≪block≫

≪CAD Element≫

design1:VenturiNozzleDesign

D = 0.05 {unit = meter}

d = 0.0163 {unit = meter}

H = 0.055 {unit = meter}

I = 0.0015 {unit = meter}

O = 0.05 {unit = meter}

vL1 = 0.05 {unit = meter}

vL2 = 0.015 {unit = meter}

vL3 = 0.15 {unit = meter}

BDD

≪block≫

≪CAD Element≫

VenturiNozzle

d: diameter[meter] {unit=meter}

D: diameter[meter] {unit=meter}

≪block≫

≪CAD Element≫

VenturiNozzleDesign

H: length[meter] {unit = meter}

I: length[meter] {unit = meter}

O: length[meter] {unit = meter}

vL1: length[meter] {unit = meter}

vL2: length[meter] {unit = meter}

vL3: length[meter] {unit = meter}

BDD

name

stereotype

inheritance

typed attributedefinitions

value

para

met

ers

type / unit

Fig. 4: The general Venturi nozzle BDD with parametersspecifying its geometric dimensions (left) and concrete Venturinozzle instance (right)

Therefore, we connect the idea of CAx process chains withSysML models created using the Object-Oriented SystemsEngineering Method (OOSEM) [15].

The resulting process that Fig. 2 presents as SysML ActivityDiagram, renders a coherent virtual product developmentapproach. Using this process systems engineers are enabledto describe the system in SysML and integrate this modelinto CAx process chains for virtual product development. Forthis, the process starts with a SysML modeling activity, inwhich the systems engineer creates an abstract system modelby using BDDs to specify elements of the physical partsof the system. Next, the process forwards parameters of theBDDs that are relevant for the CAD modeling activity. Byusing the resulting CAD model in combination with additionalinformation from the SysML diagram, the process enablesthe engineers to perform additional CAE analyses and CAMmodeling in the respective activities based on CAD-CAEor CAD-CAM process chains. Typical additional informationis, for instance, dimension parameters for geometric models,environment information for simulation, or materials and tol-erance information for the production. Since the first draftsof the product might not meet the requirements or are notmanufacturable, the activity diagram from Fig. 2 has decisionnodes which lead back to the SysML Modeling activity toimplement an evolutionary development.

Since the connection between CAD, CAE, and CAM isalready covered in the context of CAx process chains [4],[5], we will focus on the implementation of this SysML-CADconnection in the following.

As the process depicted in Fig. 2 forwards the relevantparameters from SysML to CAD, it is necessary to identify aconstruction theoretical foundation for the creation of the CADmodel. Since parameter and constraint modeling techniquesenable engineers to store the dimension parameters indepen-dently from the geometrical product description models [5],this construction theoretical approach seems to be suited forconnection dimension parameters from a SysML model witha graphical representation. By this, it is possible to separate

Name Causality Value TypeVenturi Nozzle Flow AnalysisA1 target 0.002 m2

A2 target 2.087 · 10−4 m2C given 0.98 −D given 0.05 md given 0.0163 mp1 given 594, 037.000 Pap2 target 12, 016.428 Paρ given 1.225 kg/m3v1 given 101.619 m/sv2 target 980.084 m/s

TABLE I: Flow analysis results of the concrete Venturi nozzledesign from Fig. 4

parameter names, their value or expressions describing theirvalue, and their unit from the actual geometric model. Addi-tionally, we have to keep in mind that it might be unrealistic toassume that the dimension parameters for the CAD model andthe object geometry are modeled entirely independent fromeach other. Thus, it might be helpful to include a reversedirection in this process, which allows returning parametersfrom a CAD model to SysML again.

Because not all instances of system blocks must representhardware elements with a corresponding CAD model, werequire a method to mark the blocks and their value propertiesof a BDD as parameters. To implement this, we can usespecific profiles that introduce new stereotypes for SysMLelements. Fig. 3 presents a SysML profile extension, whichenables systems engineers to mark blocks as «CAD Element»to indicate that this block also requires the creation of aCAD model. Besides, not all value properties of the block arenecessarily relevant parameters for the CAD model as well,hence the «CAD Parameters» stereotype for value propertiesindicates that this property is a CAD parameter.

V. CASE STUDY AND TOOL PRESENTATION

To visualize and apply the methods we developed in theprevious chapter, we modeled the Venturi nozzle as describedin Sec. II. Additionally, we describe how newly developed andalready existing tools support the CAx process we presentedin Fig. 2. We began the modeling process of the Venturi nozzleexample by creating a block definition diagram for a generalnozzle and extended this abstract description in a second stepto a concrete Venturi nozzle design using MagicDraw as shownin Fig. 4. To derive a concrete instance of the Venturi nozzle,we modeled the physical flow in the nozzle in a parametricdiagram. This parametric diagram enables us to express pa-rameter relationships and descriptions we require to run firstsimulations to estimate dimension parameters that create asufficient vacuum to operate a specific suction cup. Based onthe relationships described in the parametric diagram, we thenused MagicDraw’s ParaMagic plug-in and the OpenModelicasolver to determine and test multiple designs until we found asuited Venturi nozzle design. The results of this computationfor the final design are given in Fig. 4.

In parallel, we developed a MagicDraw plug-in whichexports instances of «CAD Element» blocks into a parameter

SECTION A-ASCALE 1 : 1

A

AvL1

vL2vL3

D d O H

I + (H - D)

vL1 + (vL2 / 2)I

Fig. 5: Technical drawing of a Venturi nozzle with parametersas dimension placeholders

description file and imports updates of this file again intothe MagicDraw block instances. The plug-in is structuredaccording to the component diagram Fig. 7 presents. ThisCAD plug-in for MagicDraw subdivides into a MDHandlercomponent that processes the model tree MagicDraw provides,a SIUnits component that converts units from and to repre-sentations of other tools, and a ParameterExport compo-nent that is responsible for creating the actual parameter file.On the other side, parametric CAD suites such as AutodeskInventor provide methods to handle and import parameters,create geometries that use these parameters, and to createtechnical drawings as standardized model representations.

To process the Venturi nozzle instance Fig. 4 presents, theMagicDraw plug-in searches all CAD elements in the projectand generates for each instance a parameter exchange file,which contains the parameter name, its value, and its unit. Byconnecting this file with a part drawing in Autodesk Inventor,we then modeled the geometry of the Venturi nozzle as shownin Fig. 5 and used the exchange file to define and computethe concrete instance of the Venturi nozzle based on theparameters.

To further verify the results of the Venturi nozzle, we thenused Autodesk CFD to simulate the geometric model of theVenturi nozzle as a part of the CAE process. The results of thissimulation splits into the flow velocity that Fig. 6a presentsand the pressure, which Fig. 6b visualises. If we compare theseresults of the CFD analysis with our initial analysis based onthe SysML model, we can see that the results are principally inthe same range, but provide more detailed information aboutthe velocity and pressure distribution in the nozzle design.

Finally, we used a 3D printer to print a hardware prototypeof the Venturi nozzle, which we only used to check thefunctionality of the result, as the print quality and the lackof suited measurement technology did not allow any furthervalidations about the simulation or the manufacturability ofthis hardware model.

VI. DISCUSSION

The presented approach addresses several problems frommulti-paradigm modeling, such as the handling of hetero-geneous models and modeling languages by introducing aprocess chain that connects heterogeneous system models. Anadvantage of our integration is that it supports an evolutionarysystem development without breaking the traditional process

Speed m/s1111

0

57.037628.51880 85.5563

500

(a) Autodesk CFD Analysis Results (Velocity)

Speed m/s1111

Speed m/s

Static Pressure Pa

1111

0

595 039

- 571 782

85.556357.037628.51880

0

500

(b) Autodesk CFD Analysis Results (Pressure)

Fig. 6: Autodesk CFD Analysis Results of the Venturi NozzleDesign based on the Parameters specified in the instance fromFig. 4

of virtual product development design, simulation, and man-ufacturing. An evolutionary approach enables the continuousimprovement of the system design over multiple iterations.Thus, the development information is not only forwardedto the next process activity but may also flow back fromeach development step to the previous process activity. Bythis, the engineer can iteratively improve the design based onflaws that the next process activity uncovers and even performsubsequent development steps in parallel. Since the connectionbetween the SysML and the CAD model enables reimportingchanged parameters from the CAD model into SysML again,the created models are reusable for the next developmentiteration. If the engineer that creates the SysML model forgetsto define a parameter the engineer for the CAD model requires,the later can specify this parameter himself and use the CADplug-in to reintegrate this parameter to the SysML model.Hence, it is possible to synchronize the SysML and the CADmodel with reduced overhead compared to a manual updateprocess. Moreover, this approach could be extended withadditional automated checks for model consistency to decidewhether the change the CAD engineer made are valid.

One issue we did not solve yet is that no data is returnedfrom the CAE and CAM to the SysML model, to improvethe quality of the next development iteration. Additionally,the usability of our process would improve even more, ifrequirements and general model sanity checks for the SysML-CAD process chain would be performed e.g., by automaticallychecking whether all dimensions are within certain bounds andfit in their assembly based on given requirements.

In order to improve our approach, future works couldinvestigate the mathematical connection between the differentabstraction levels further, for instance by taking additionalworks about the theory behind systems engineering [16], prin-

CADPlugIn CADSuite

Drawing

ModelTree

Drawing

components

subcomponent

port

input

output

dependency

Geometry

Parameters

SIUnits

ParameterExport

MDHandler

Fig. 7: Component Diagram of the plug-in structure

ciple solutions for the design of technical products [17], multi-view modeling and graph transformations for MBSE [18],[19], or system and simulation theories for multi-paradigmmodeling [20] into account.

Finally, digital mock-ups could serve as virtual prototypesthat are usable in all stages of the virtual product developmentapproach [4]. An extension of the process developed in thiswork could be to investigate how this integration could makeuse of digital shadows and twins. By developing an integratedtoolchain and connecting knowledge, we ultimately take stepstowards a digital twin that could adapt automatically depend-ing on the system’s state and suggest design improvements.

VII. RELATED WORKModel integration in the MBSE process is subject to ongo-

ing research. Our work relates to multiple research domains,such as systems engineering, virtual product design, and multi-paradigm modeling.

The approach presented in [21] employs SysML to orga-nize and integrate heterogeneous models that contribute toa common system model. Relationships and dependenciesbetween these models are formulated in SysML to achievea consistent model. Similar to our solution, this approachinvolves constructing a high-level system model in SysMLfor integrating CAE methods. Additionally, they address theconnection of SysML with simple engineering constraints andrequirements for a CAE analysis. However, they do not addressthe creation of concrete CAD models, nor do they provide anytools to automate the integration.

Another methodology is more focused on virtual productdevelopment [4] and provides an extensive overview of model-based virtual product development methods. It is not only re-stricted to the modeling aspects of mechanical engineering butalso introduces methods for the development of electrical orsoftware systems. The processes cover a considerable numberof modeling techniques for virtual product development andsystems engineering. However, they do not render a generalmethodology to systematically integrate models, described ina systems modeling language such as SysML, with otherartifacts of the virtual product development process.

In addition to the generative aspects, the approach in [22]explains how MBSE provides models to handle design in-formation created and processed by multiple stakeholders ofthe systems engineering process. To achieve this goal, theyuse multiple tool plug-ins to generate and exchange modelinformation between different tools automatically. Althoughthe approach presents some general aspects, the developedtools mainly focus on the usage at Johnson Space Center andare not a general methodology.

Another elaboration provides a general overview of multi-paradigm modeling in combination with simulation [20]. Es-pecially the concept of multi-formalism modeling is described,where interacting constituents are modeled using differentformalism in a coupled model. Multi-formalism modelingis applied, when it is convenient or necessary to addressseveral concerns within particular formalisms and to bridgedifferent abstraction levels. Our method to integrate SysMLdiagrams and CAD models of the CAx process correspondsto this approach. SysML and CAD correspond to differentformalisms, which together contribute to a target component.Connecting SysML and CAx thus enables the development ofintegrated heterogeneous models.

VIII. CONCLUSION

We presented a MDSE methodology for virtual productdesign and demonstrated its feasibility for virtual productdevelopment by modeling a small case study from mechanicalengineering.

Our methodology consists of a general process for virtualproduct development, of which the SysML-CAD process chainhas been implemented to support the creation of a virtualproduct design based on parameters specified in the SysMLmodel. To establish this process chain, we created a SysMLprofile, which enables systems engineers to mark blocksof a SysML Block Definition Diagram as «CAD Element»and value properties that should serve as parametric designparameters as «CAD Parameter».

To automate the exchange of model information in theSysML-CAD process chain, we implemented a MagicDrawplug-in that exports and imports model information into aformat Autodesk Inventor can process to set the dimensionsof a concrete nozzle design automatically.

Since this information exchange only represents the firststep of a virtual product development, we applied additionalmethods from virtual product design such as different simu-lations to analyze and manufacture a prototype of a concreteVenturi nozzle design.

For this, we analyzed the created Venturi nozzle design bya CFD simulation model based on the Venturi nozzle designspecification in the CAD model. By this, we were able torefine the flow simulation results of the Venturi nozzle wealready started in the SysML based on parametric diagramsand their analysis. Finally, we used a 3D printer to create afirst hardware prototype.

In conclusion, we presented a SysML-CAD process chainand embedded it into a virtual product development environ-

ment. For this purpose, we developed a process to connectinstances of hardware describing elements in SysML withCAD models, which themselves are integrated into CAxprocess chains. Moreover, we provided methods and tools toautomatically exchange parameters between these instancesand an external geometry description of a parametric CADmodel in the context of a MDSE methodology.

REFERENCES

[1] R. France and B. Rumpe, “Model-driven Development of Complex Soft-ware: A Research Roadmap,” Future of Software Engineering (FOSE’07), pp. 37–54, May 2007.

[2] K. Hölldobler, B. Rumpe, and A. Wortmann, “Software Language En-gineering in the Large: Towards Composing and Deriving Languages,”Computer Languages, Systems & Structures, vol. 54, pp. 386–405, 2018.

[3] A. Levenchuk, “SysML is the Point of Departure for MBSE, Not theDestination,” INCOSE Insight, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 54–56, Dec. 2009.

[4] M. Eigner, D. Roubanov, and R. Zafirov, Modellbasierte virtuelleProduktentwicklung. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014.

[5] K.-H. Grote, B. Bender, and D. Göhlich, Dubbel Taschenbuch für denMaschinenbau: Taschenbuch für den Maschinenbau, 01 2018.

[6] S. Ramo, “Systems engineering manual,” Federal Aviation Agency(FAA), 2004.

[7] H. Eisner, Essentials of project and systems engineering management.John Wiley & Sons, 2008.

[8] I. C. on Systems Engineering, “Systems Engineering Handbook: A"what To" Guide for All SE Practitioners.” INCOSE, 2004.

[9] D. D. Walden, G. J. Roedler, K. Forsberg, R. D. Hamelin, and T. M.Shortell, Eds., Systems Engineering Handbook: A Guide for System LifeCycle Processes and Activities, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2015.

[10] A. L. Ramos, J. V. Ferreira, and J. Barceló, “Model-Based SystemsEngineering: An Emerging Approach for Modern Systems,” IEEETransactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applicationsand Reviews), vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 101–111, Jan 2012.

[11] OMG Systems Modeling Language, Version 1.6 ed., Object ManagementGroup, 2019.

[12] T. V. Huynh and J. S. Osmundson, “A systems engineering methodologyfor analyzing systems of systems using the systems modeling language(SysML),” Department of Systems Engineering, Naval PostgraduateSchool, Monterey, 2006.

[13] S. C. Spangelo, D. Kaslow, C. Delp, B. Cole, L. Anderson, E. Fosse,B. S. Gilbert, L. Hartman, T. Kahn, and J. Cutler, “Applying modelbased systems engineering (MBSE) to a standard CubeSat,” in 2012IEEE Aerospace Conference. IEEE, 2012, pp. 1–20.

[14] OMG Unified Modeling Language (OMG UML), Version 2.5.1 ed.,Object Management Group, Dec. 2017.

[15] S. Friedenthal, A. Moore, and R. Steiner, A Practical Guide to SysML,Third Edition: The Systems Modeling Language, 3rd ed. San Francisco,CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 2014.

[16] W. A. Wymore, Model-Based Systems Engineering, 1st ed. Boca Raton,FL, USA: CRC Press, Inc., 1993.

[17] R. Koller and N. Kastrup, Prinziplösungen zur Konstruktion technischerProdukte. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1998.

[18] A. Shah, D. Schaefer, and C. Paredis, “Enabling Multi-View ModelingWith SysML Profiles and Model Transformations,” 2009, pp. 527–538,the 6th International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management ;Conference date: 06-07-2009 Through 08-07-2009.

[19] A. A. Shah, A. A. Kerzhner, D. Schaefer, and C. J. Paredis, “Multi-view Modeling to Support Embedded Systems Engineering in SysML,”Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 5765, pp. 580–601, 01 2010.

[20] H. Vangheluwe, J. Lara, and P. Mosterman, “An Introduction to Multi-Paradigm Modelling and Simulation,” Proceedings of the AIS’2002Conference, 01 2002.

[21] L. Bassi, C. Secchi, M. Bonfe, and C. Fantuzzi, “A SysML-BasedMethodology for Manufacturing Machinery Modeling and Design,”IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 1049–1062, Dec 2011.

[22] L. Wang, M. Izygon, S. Okon, H. Wagner, and L. Garner, “Effort toAccelerate MBSE Adoption and Usage at JSC,” AIAA SPACE 2016, 092016.