0
Review Article

Status, Comparison, and Issues of Computer-Aided Design Model Data Exchange Methods Based on Standardized Neutral Files and Web Ontology Language File

[+] Author and Article Information
Yuchu Qin, Xiaojun Liu

The State Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacturing Equipment and Technology, School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China

Wenlong Lu

The State Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacturing Equipment and Technology, School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China
e-mail: hustwenlong@mail.hust.edu.cn

Qunfen Qi, Paul J. Scott, Xiangqian Jiang

EPSRC Centre for Innovative Manufacturing in Advanced Metrology,
University of Huddersfield,
Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK

Yanru Zhong

Guangxi Colleges and Universities Key Laboratory of Intelligent Processing of Computer Images and Graphics,
Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin 541004, China

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Computers and Information Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SCIENCE IN ENGINEERING. Manuscript received January 29, 2016; final manuscript received July 22, 2016; published online November 7, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Monica Bordegoni.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 17(1), 010801 (Nov 07, 2016) (10 pages) Paper No: JCISE-16-1047; doi: 10.1115/1.4034325 History: Received January 29, 2016; Revised July 22, 2016

Exchanging computer-aided design (CAD) model data among heterogeneous CAD systems is indispensable for collaborative product development. Currently, the industry mainly uses the standardized neutral files-based methods to implement such exchange. While at the same time, the application of web ontology language (OWL) file and underlying semantic web technologies in CAD model data exchange is gaining importance and popularity within the academia. The coexistence of different types of methods has generated a series of controversies and questions within the industry and the academia. Yet, can the neutral files-based exchange methods completely implement model data exchange among heterogeneous CAD systems? What challenges have been addressed to date by the developed CAD model data exchange standards? Why OWL has been introduced to CAD model data exchange? Does CAD model data exchange really need OWL? Are there any issues in existing neutral files-based exchange methods and OWL file-based exchange methods need to be addressed in future studies? This paper proposes to conduct a study of the standardized neutral files-based exchange methods and OWL file-based exchange methods. An in-depth analysis of the widely used standard for the exchange of product model data (STEP) method and the newly emerging OWL methods is first provided. Then, the paper makes a detailed comparison between these two types of methods based on this analysis. Finally, some issues in the two types of methods that need to be addressed in the future are discussed.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Xu, X. , 2008, Integrating Advanced Computer-Aided Design, Manufacturing, and Numerical Control: Principles and Implementations, Information Science Reference, New York.
Autodesk, 2011, “ DXF Reference,” Autodesk, Inc., San Rafael, CA.
ASME Y14.26M, 1989, “ Digital Representation for Communication of Product Definition Data,” ASME, New York.
ISO, 1994, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 1: Overview and Fundamental Principles,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-1.
McGuinness, D. L. , and Harmelen, F. V. , 2004, “ OWL Web Ontology Language Overview,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/
Berners-Lee, T. , Hendler, J. , and Lassila, O. , 2001, “ The Semantic Web,” Sci. Am., 284(5), pp. 28–37. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-semantic-web/
Gerbino, S. , 2003, “ Tools for the Interoperability Among CAD Systems,” International Conference on Tools and Methods Evolution in Engineering Design, Cassino, Naples, and Salerno, Italy, June 3–5, pp. 137–149.
Fenves, S. J. , Sriram, R. D. , Subrahmanian, E. , and Rachuri, S. , 2005, “ Product Information Exchange: Practices and Standards,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 5(3), pp. 238–246. [CrossRef]
Bianconi, F. , Conti, P. , and Di Angelo, L. , 2006, “ Interoperability Among CAD/CAM/CAE Systems: A Review of Current Research Trends,” Conference on Geometric Modeling and Imaging: New Trends, IEEE, New York, pp. 82–89.
Srinivasan, V. , 2008, “ Standardizing the Specification, Verification, and Exchange of Product Geometry: Research, Status and Trends,” Comput.-Aided Des., 40(7), pp. 738–749. [CrossRef]
Gielingh, W. , 2008, “ An Assessment of the Current State of Product Data Technologies,” Comput.-Aided Des., 40(7), pp. 750–759. [CrossRef]
Rachuri, S. , Subrahmanian, E. , Bouras, A. , Fenves, S. J. , Foufou, S. , and Sriram, R. D. , 2008, “ Information Sharing and Exchange in the Context of Product Lifecycle Management: Role of Standards,” Comput.-Aided Des., 40(7), pp. 789–800. [CrossRef]
Fortineau, V. , Paviot, T. , and Lamouri, S. , 2013, “ Improving the Interoperability of Industrial Information Systems With Description Logic-Based Models—The State of the Art,” Comput. Ind., 64(4), pp. 363–375. [CrossRef]
Gartner Report, 2006, “ User Survey: Mechanical CAx, Europe and North America,” Report No. G00137912.
Bloor, S. , and Owen, J. , 2003, Product Data Exchange, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, UK.
Pratt, M. J. , 2001, “ Introduction to ISO 10303—The STEP Standard for Product Data Exchange,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 1(1), pp. 102–103. [CrossRef]
ISO, 2011, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 203: Application Protocol: Configuration Controlled 3D Design of Mechanical Parts and Assemblies,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-203.
ISO, 2010, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 214: Application Protocol: Core Data for Automotive Mechanical Design Processes,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-214.
ISO, 2004, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 11: Description Methods: The EXPRESS Language Reference Manual,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-11.
ISO, 2002, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 21: Implementation Methods: Clear Text Encoding of the Exchange Structure,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-21.
Kim, J. , Pratt, M. J. , Iyer, R. G. , and Sriram, R. D. , 2008, “ Standardized Data Exchange of CAD Models With Design Intent,” Comput.-Aided Des., 40(7), pp. 760–777. [CrossRef]
Altidor, J. , Wileden, J. , McPherson, J. , Grosse, I. , Krishnamurty, S. , Cordeiro, F. , and John, A. L. S. , 2011, “ A Programming Language Approach to Parametric CAD Data Exchange,” ASME Paper No. DETC2011-48530, pp. 779–791.
Brunnermeier, S. B. , and Martin, S. A. , 1999, “ Interoperability Cost Analysis of the U.S. Automotive Supply Chain,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Szykman, S. , Fenves, S. J. , Keirouz, W. , and Shooter, S. B. , 2001, “ A Foundation for Interoperability in Next-Generation Product Development Systems,” Comput.-Aided Des., 33(7), pp. 545–559. [CrossRef]
ISO, 2014, “ Industrial Automation Systems and Integration—Product Data Representation and Exchange—Part 242: Application Protocol: Managed Model-Based 3D Engineering,” ISO, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard No. ISO 10303-242.
STEP AP242 Project organization, 2014, “ STEP AP242 Project,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, http://www.ap242.org/
CAx Implementor Forum Participants, 2016, “ CAx Implementor Forum,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, https://cax-if.org/
CAx Implementor Forum Participants, 2016, “ CAx IF Implementation Coverage,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, https://cax-if.org/vendor_info.php
Metzger, F. , 1996, “ The Challenge of Capturing the Semantics of STEP Data Models Precisely,” Workshop on Product Knowledge Sharing for Integrated Enterprises, ESPRIT Project No. 9049.
Krima, S. , Krima, R. , Fiorentini, X. , Sudarsan, R. , and Sriram, R. D. , 2009, “ OntoSTEP: OWL-DL Ontology for STEP,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Sarigecili, M. I. , Roy, U. , and Rachuri, S. , 2014, “ Interpreting the Semantics of GD&T Specifications of a Product for Tolerance Analysis,” Comput.-Aided Des., 47(2), pp. 72–84. [CrossRef]
Fenves, S. J. , 2002, “ A Core Product Model for Representing Design Information,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Rachuri, S. , Han, Y. H. , Feng, S. C. , Roy, U. , Wang, F. , Sriram, R. D. , and Lyons, K. W. , 2004, “ Object-Oriented Representation of Electro-Mechanical Assemblies Using UML,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Baader, F. , Calvanese, D. , McGuinness, D. L. , Nardi, D. , and Patel-Schneider, P. F. , 2010, The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Gruber, T. R. , 1993, “ A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications,” Knowl. Acquis., 5(2), pp. 199–220. [CrossRef]
Negri, E. , Fumagalli, L. , Garetti, M. , and Tanca, L. , 2015, “ Requirements and Languages for the Semantic Representation of Manufacturing Systems,” Comput. Ind., 81(9), pp. 55–66.
El Kadiri, S. , and Kiritsis, D. , 2015, “ Ontologies in the Context of Product Lifecycle Management: State of the Art Literature Review,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 53(18), pp. 5657–5668. [CrossRef]
Ramos, L. , 2015, “ Semantic Web for Manufacturing, Trends and Open Issues: Toward a State of the Art,” Comput. Ind. Eng., 90(12), pp. 444–460. [CrossRef]
Dartigues, C. , and Ghodous, P. , 2002, “ Product Data Exchange Using Ontologies,” Artificial Intelligence in Design’02, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 617–637.
Patil, L. , Dutta, D. , and Sriram, R. D. , 2005, “ Ontology-Based Exchange of Product Data Semantics,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., 2(3), pp. 213–225. [CrossRef]
Seo, T. S. , Lee, Y. S. , Cheon, S. U. , Han, S. H. , Lalit, P. , and Debasish, D. , 2005, “ Sharing CAD Models Based on Feature Ontology of Commands History,” Int. J. CAD/CAM, 5(1), pp. 39–47.
Kim, K. Y. , Manley, D. G. , and Yang, H. , 2006, “ Ontology-Based Assembly Design and Information Sharing for Collaborative Product Development,” Comput.-Aided Des., 38(12), pp. 1233–1250. [CrossRef]
Abdul-Ghafour, S. , Ghodous, P. , Shariat, B. , and Perna, E. , 2006, “ An Ontology-Based Approach for ‘Procedural CAD Models’ Data Exchange,” Leading the Web in Concurrent Engineering, Next Generation Concurrent Engineering, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 251–259.
Abdul-Ghafour, S. , Ghodous, P. , Shariat, B. , and Perna, E. , 2008, “ Towards an Intelligent CAD Models Sharing Based on Semantic Web Technologies,” Collaborative Product and Service Life Cycle Management for a Sustainable World, Springer, London, pp. 195–203.
Abdul-Ghafour, S. , Ghodous, P. , Shariat, B. , Perna, E. , and Khosrowshahi, F. , 2014, “ Semantic Interoperability of Knowledge in Feature-Based CAD Models,” Comput.-Aided Des., 56(11), pp. 45–57. [CrossRef]
Yang, Q. Z. , and Miao, C. Y. , 2007, “ Semantic Enhancement and Ontology for Interoperability of Design Information Systems,” IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, IEEE, New York, pp. 169–176.
Gupta, R. K. , and Gurumoorthy, B. , 2008, “ A Feature-Based Framework for Semantic Interoperability of Product Models,” J. Mech. Eng., 54(6), pp. 446–457.
Tursi, A. , Panetto, H. , Morel, G. , and Dassisti, M. , 2009, “ Ontological Approach for Products-Centric Information System Interoperability in Networked Manufacturing Enterprises,” Annu. Rev. Control, 33(2), pp. 238–245. [CrossRef]
Barbau, R. , Krima, S. , Rachuri, S. , Narayanan, A. , Fiorentini, X. , Foufou, S. , and Sriram, R. D. , 2012, “ OntoSTEP: Enriching Product Model Data Using Ontologies,” Comput.-Aided Des., 44(6), pp. 575–590. [CrossRef]
Panetto, H. , Dassisti, M. , and Tursi, A. , 2012, “ ONTO-PDM: Product-Driven ONTOlogy for Product Data Management Interoperability Within Manufacturing Process Environment,” Adv. Eng. Inf., 26(2), pp. 334–348. [CrossRef]
Tessier, S. , and Wang, Y. , 2013, “ Ontology-Based Feature Mapping and Verification Between CAD Systems,” Adv. Eng. Inf., 27(1), pp. 76–92. [CrossRef]
Ahmed, F. , and Han, S. , 2015, “ Interoperability of Product and Manufacturing Information Using Ontology,” Concurrent Eng., 23(3), pp. 265–278. [CrossRef]
Sriti, M. F. , Assouroko, I. , Ducellier, G. , Boutinaud, P. , and Eynard, B. , 2015, “ Ontology-Based Approach for Product Information Exchange,” Int. J. Prod. Lifecycle Manage., 8(1), pp. 1–23. [CrossRef]
He, L. , Ming, X. , Ni, Y. , Li, M. , Zheng, M. , and Xu, Z. , 2015, “ Ontology-Based Information Integration and Sharing for Collaborative Part and Tooling Development,” Concurrent Eng., 23(3), pp. 199–212. [CrossRef]
Patil, L. , 2005, Interoperability of Formal Semantics of Product Data Across Product Development Systems, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Lee, M. J. , Jung, M. , and Suh, H. W. , 2006, “ Semantic Mapping Based on Ontology and a Bayesian Network and Its Application to CAD and PDM Integration,” ASME Paper No. DETC2006-99419, pp. 591–602.
Zhu, L. , Jayaram, U. , Jayaram, S. , and Kim, O. , 2009, “ Ontology-Driven Integration of CAD/CAE Applications: Strategies and Comparisons,” ASME Paper No. DETC2009-87768, pp. 1461–1472.
Zhan, P. , Jayaram, U. , Kim, O. , and Zhu, L. , 2010, “ Knowledge Representation and Ontology Mapping Methods for Product Data in Engineering Applications,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 10(2), p. 021004. [CrossRef]
Ciocoiu, M. , Nau, D. S. , and Gruninger, M. , 2001, “ Ontologies for Integrating Engineering Applications,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 1(1), pp. 12–22. [CrossRef]
Horrocks, I. , Sattler, U. , and Tobies, S. , 1999, “ Practical Reasoning for Expressive Description Logics,” Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning, Springer, Berlin, Germany, pp. 161–180.
Horrocks, I. , Patel-Schneider, P. F. , Boley, H. , Tabet, S. , Grosof, B. , and Dean, M. , 2004, “ SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/
Pilehvar, M. T. , and Navigli, R. , 2015, “ From Senses to Texts: An All-in-One Graph-Based Approach for Measuring Semantic Similarity,” Artif. Intell., 228(11), pp. 95–128. [CrossRef]
Horrocks, I. , Patel-Schneider, P. F. , and Van Harmelen, F. , 2003, “ From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language,” J. Web Semantics, 1(1), pp. 7–26. [CrossRef]
Uschold, M. , and Gruninger, M. , 1996, “ Ontologies: Principles, Methods and Applications,” Knowl. Eng. Rev., 11(2), pp. 93–136. [CrossRef]
Fernández-López, M. , Gómez-Pérez, A. , and Juristo, N. , 1997, “ Methontology: From Ontological Art Towards Ontological Engineering,” Ontological Engineering AAAI-97 Spring Symposium Series, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, pp. 33–40.
Swartout, B. , Patil, R. , Knight, K. , and Russ, T. , 1996, “ Toward Distributed Use of Large-Scale Ontologies,” 10th Workshop Knowledge Acquisition Knowledge-Based Systems, AAAI Spring Symposium on Ontological Engineering, pp. 138–148.
Noy, N. F. , and McGuinness, D. L. , 2001, “ Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology,” Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, Technical Report No. KSL-01-05.
Ahmed, S. , Sanghee, K. , and Wallace, K. M. , 2007, “ A Methodology for Creating Ontologies for Engineering Design,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(2), pp. 132–140. [CrossRef]
Ameri, F. , Kulvatunyou, B. , Ivezic, N. , and Kaikhah, K. , 2014, “ Ontological Conceptualization Based on the SKOS,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 14(3), p. 031006. [CrossRef]
Fiorentini, X. , Gambino, I. , Liang, V. C. , Foufou, S. , Rachuri, R. , Mani, M. , and Bock, C. , 2007, “ An Ontology for Assembly Representation,” National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.
Lin, J. , Fox, M. S. , and Bilgic, T. , 1996, “ A Requirement Ontology for Engineering Design,” Concurrent Eng.: Res. Appl., 4(3), pp. 279–291. [CrossRef]
Yang, S. C. , Patil, L. , and Dutta, D. , 2010, “ Function Semantic Representation (FSR): A Rule-Based Ontology for Product Functions,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 10(3), p. 031001. [CrossRef]
Abdul-Ghafour, S. , Ghodous, P. , and Shariat, B. , 2012, “ Integration of Product Models by Ontology Development,” 2012 IEEE 13th International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration, IRI, IEEE, New York, pp. 548–555.
Lu, W. , Qin, Y. , Liu, X. , Huang, M. , Zhou, L. , and Jiang, X. , 2015, “ Enriching the Semantics of Variational Geometric Constraint Data With Ontology,” Comput.-Aided Des., 63(6), pp. 72–85. [CrossRef]
Zhong, Y. , Huang, M. , and Qin, Y. , 2013, Knowledge Representation of Geometrical Product Specifications and Verification, Xidian University Press, Xi’an, China.
Zhong, Y. , Qin, Y. , Huang, M. , Lu, W. , Gao, W. , and Du, Y. , 2013, “ Automatically Generating Assembly Tolerance Types With an Ontology-Based Approach,” Comput.-Aided Des., 45(11), pp. 1253–1275. [CrossRef]
Zhong, Y. , Qin, Y. , Huang, M. , Lu, W. , and Chang, L. , 2014, “ Constructing a Meta-Model for Assembly Tolerance Types With a Description Logic Based Approach,” Comput.-Aided Des., 48(3), pp. 1–16. [CrossRef]
Qin, Y. , Lu, W. , Liu, X. , Huang, M. , Zhou, L. , and Jiang, X. , 2015, “ Description Logic-Based Automatic Generation of Geometric Tolerance Zones,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 79(5), pp. 1221–1237. [CrossRef]
Zhao, W. , and Liu, J. , 2008, “ OWL/SWRL Representation Methodology for EXPRESS-Driven Product Information Model: Part I. Implementation Methodology,” Comput. Ind., 59(6), pp. 580–589. [CrossRef]
Matsokis, A. , and Kiritsis, D. , 2010, “ An Ontology-Based Approach for Product Lifecycle Management,” Comput. Ind., 61(8), pp. 787–797. [CrossRef]
Vegetti, M. , Leone, H. , and Henning, G. , 2011, “ PRONTO: An Ontology for Comprehensive and Consistent Representation of Product Information,” Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., 24(8), pp. 1305–1327. [CrossRef]
Euzenat, J. , and Shvaiko, P. , 2013, Ontology Matching, 2nd ed., Springer, Berlin, Germany.
Lu, W. , Qin, Y. , Qi, Q. , Zeng, W. , Zhong, Y. , Liu, X. , and Jiang, X. , 2016, “ Selecting a Semantic Similarity Measure for Concepts in Two Different CAD Model Data Ontologies,” Adv. Eng. Inf., 30(3), pp. 449–466. [CrossRef]
Zolin, E. , 2013, “ Complexity of Reasoning in Description Logics,” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/∼ezolin/dl/
Ortiz, M. , Rudolph, S. , and Simkus, M. , 2010, “ Worst-Case Optimal Reasoning for the Horn-DL Fragments of OWL 1 and 2,” 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 269–279.
Lipman, R. , and Lubell, J. , 2015, “ Conformance Checking of PMI Representation in CAD Model STEP Data Exchange Files,” Comput.-Aided Des., 66(9), pp. 14–23. [CrossRef]
W3C OWL Working Group, 2012, “ OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview (Second Edition),” last accessed Jan. 18, 2016, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
Horrocks, I. , Kutz, O. , and Sattler, U. , 2006, “ The Even More Irresistible SROIQ,” 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, AAAI Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 57–67.
Goel, A. K. , Vattam, S. , Wiltgen, B. , and Helms, M. , 2012, “ Cognitive, Collaborative, Conceptual and Creative—Four Characteristics of the Next Generation of Knowledge-Based CAD Systems: A Study in Biologically Inspired Design,” Comput.-Aided Des., 44(10), pp. 879–900. [CrossRef]
Chandrasegaran, S. K. , Ramani, K. , Sriram, R. D. , Horváth, I. , Bernard, A. , Harik, R. F. , and Gao, W. , 2013, “ The Evolution, Challenges, and Future of Knowledge Representation in Product Design Systems,” Comput.-Aided Des., 45(2), pp. 204–228. [CrossRef]
Feeney, A. B. , Frechette, S. P. , and Srinivasan, V. , 2015, “ A Portrait of an ISO STEP Tolerancing Standard as an Enabler of Smart Manufacturing Systems,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 15(2), p. 021001. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Framework for OWL file-based exchange methods

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In