Towards a New Paradigm of Theory for Having a Dynamic System: Operation Management through Design...
-
Upload
olivia-kelley -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
1
Transcript of Towards a New Paradigm of Theory for Having a Dynamic System: Operation Management through Design...
Towards a New Paradigm of Theory for Having a Dynamic System:
Operation Management through Design (OMTD)
W.J. Zhang
University of Saskatchewan, CanadaEmail: [email protected]
加拿大萨斯喀彻温大学University of Saskatchewan
1907 成立 麦克林排名 医学 博士类 9 共 15
2 Nobel 获得者 同步原子发射器 (CLS)
System
Dynamic system
Structure, Function, ……
Zhang’s FCBPSS framework
Principle
Context
Behaviour
Function
State
Structure
(Lin and Zhang, 2004, Int J of Human-Computer Studies)
Dynamic system
Change Is Dependent on
Time
Space
Event
What is motive or cause to lead to change ?
Mechanics: force or pressure
Economics: profit
Sociology: Maslow architecture
T-S-E
T-S-E
T-S-E
Dynamic system
System (Structure/State)
Input (cause, stimuli)
Output (effect, response)
f(s) g(s)T-S-E T-S-E
T-S-E
T-S-E
- State
- States change
- Caused by force
- Time dependent
- Continuous
Time dependent, force driven dynamic system
Dynamic system
Dynamic system
Force -> Displacement change
Force-displacement relation is govern by Newtonian laws
Both force and displacement are functions of time
- State
- States change
- Caused by event
- Event dependent
- Discrete
State variables: John, Chris, Table A, Table BState: 1 Chris=1: Chris is present; Chris=0: Chris is absentEvent: Chris is hunger -> State variable Chris=1
Dynamic system
Event: Chris is hunger -> State variable Chris=1;John: eating to stop
Event dependent, event driven dynamics
Dynamic system
Event (Chris is present) -> Waiter receives Chris
Principle: restaurant is a place to provide food
Both force and displacement are functions of time
Dynamic system
Infrastructure and substance subsystems
(Mat: material; E: energy; S: signal; H: human, M: machine; Eco: ecological)
Dynamic system
Infrastructure: frame –> motor -> links -> workload
Substance: electrical charge -> current -> motor
State variables: John, Chris, Table A, Table BState: 1 Chris=1: Chris is present; Chris=0: Chris is absentEvent: Chris is hunger -> State variable Chris=1
Dynamic system
Event: Chris is hunger -> State variable Chris=1;John: eating to stop
Infrastructure: restaurant facility, e.g., space, furniture, etc.
Substance: staff, customers, foods, etc.
Design and Operation
Design:
Determine the infrastructure of a dynamic system to achieve the required performance under the required constraint
Operation:
Determine the substance of a dynamic system to achieve the required performance of the infrastructure and/or the required performance of the substance
Towards a New Paradigm of Theory for Having a Dynamic System:
Operation Management through Design (OMTD)
The sense of having
User and Environment
Design Operation
Design and operation both contribute to having a system, and they are not separable
A remark on operation
1. Operation: leading, planning, coordinating. Controlling
2. Operation management: how the operation is done
3. Feed-forward operation management: operation
management without input from performance
4. Feedback operation management: operation
management with input from performance
Management science: law and modeling
A remark on design
Structure VS configuration
Structure: component and joint
Configuration: component and joint layout in space
Design includes to determine both structure and configuration
Design VS Operation
1. Different designs may affect the choice of a different operation and to further yield a particular performance
2. Different operations may affect the choice of a different design and to further yield a particular performance
3. Design and operation are two factors and they have a joint effect on a particular performance, though design goes first and operation follows
Design VS Operation
This man is a system: - infrastructure: body- substance: cognition and emotion- design: different posture, shape,
configuration - operation: cognition and emotion
The man on the left lies to do casual reading
Design chooses operation
This guy needs to have a deep thinking, so he changes his facial expression to the one as shown
Operation chooses design
Embodiment AI (Piefier et al., 2007, Science)Shape affects cognition
DFC (Design for control) (Zhang et al., 1999, IEEE/ASME Mechatronics)
IMB (Integrated Mind and Body) to rehabilitation (Zhang et al., 2009, CIHR proposal)
Design VS Operation
General theory: Operation management Through Design (OMTD)
1. Manage operation right starting at the design stage
2. Design includes: (1) structure and (2) configuration
3. Structure has the aspects of (1) architecture, (2)
number, (3) dimension, and (4) material
4. Configuration has the aspects of (1) space occupation
and (2) mass distribution
5. Operation: leading, planning, coordinating and
controlling
General theory: Operation management Through Design (OMTD)
6. Design for control: design a structure and configuration
to facilitate control
7. Design and control simultaneous processing
8. Implication of OMTD to control: a new intelligent control
theory (design is an extra resource to control)
9. Implication of OMTD to design: a new intelligent design
theory (design is subject to an extra constraint resulting
from control)
Specific OMTD theories
Design for Control (DFC) (Zhang et al., 1999, IEEE/ASME
Mechatronics)
1. Design a mechanical structure so that the system keeps
its total center of gravity stationery
2. Dynamics of such a structure is not affected by gravity
3. Workload to control is thus reduced (owing to absence
of gravitational effect)
Specific OMTD theories
Design for Control (DFC) (Zhang et al., 1999, IEEE/ASME
Mechatronics)
4. Design a mechanical structure so that the system is
uncoupled or decoupled if the system has multi-degrees of
freedom (energy or resource input)
5. Such a system has uncoupled or decoupled dynamics
6. Complexity of control for such a system is reduced (owing
to uncoupled behavior of multi-inputs)
Specific OMTD theories
Design for Control (DFC) (Zhang et al., 1999, IEEE/ASME
Mechatronics) – Methodology (for gravitational effect)
Dynamic model of the structure or configuration of a system ->
Identify the part of gravitational effect -> analyze this part to
determine the structural parameter (if any) so that the part can
be nil
Specific OMTD theories
Design for Control (DFC) (Zhang et al., 1999, IEEE/ASME
Mechatronics) – Methodology (for MIMO decoupling)
Dynamic model of the structure or configuration of a system ->
Identify the parts associated with x, (x: basic state variable) ->
analyze these parts to determine the structural parameter (if
any) so that the terms xi and xj (including their derivatives) do
not have multiplicative term
Specific OMTD theories
Concurrent Design and Control (CDC) (Li, Zhang, Chen,
2001, IEEE/ASME Mechatronics)
1. Categorize design parameters, DP, and control parameters
CP
2. Define into a multi-object optimization problem by having
DP and CP as variables to be optimized
3. Solve the optimization problem, resulting in DP and CP
Specific OMTD theories
Concurrent Design and Control (CDC) (Li, Zhang, Chen,
2001, IEEE/ASME Mechatronics) - Methodology I (model-
based)
Formulate a model of the dynamics of a system and having a
model of control system -> formulate an optimization problem
model -> solve the model -> DP and CP
Specific OMTD theories
Concurrent Design and Control (CDC) (Li, Zhang, Chen,
2001, IEEE/ASME Mechatronics) - Methodology II
(experiment-based) – Pil and Asade (2001)
Make a structure (DP1) of a dynamic system -> make a
control system (CP1) -> measure the performance of the
system -> modify DP1 to DP2 – make a control system (CP2)
- > measure the performance of the modified system -> …..
Specific OMTD theories
Leading, Planning, Coordinating, Controlling
Design
D-P D-C
D-P-C
Specific OMTD theories
1
3
2
5
4
7
6(1,2)
(1,2)
(4,1)
(4,3)
(1,2)
(1,3)
(1,2)
(1,5)
(1,1) (1,2)
(1,1)(1,2)
(2,2)(2,1)
(1,1) (1,2)
{15} {10}
{10}{15}
{-}
{-}
{120} (3,2) (3,2)
(travel time, arc capacity)
{node capacity}
Example of CDP (emergency evacuation)
Source node
Sink node
In node 1, two categories of evacuees, 1st to Place 6 and 2nd to Place 7
Wang and Zhang, 2010, IEEE Intelligent Transportation System
Specific OMTD theoriesExample (emergency evacuation)
{initial occupancy, nod capacity}
(travel time, arc capacity)
1
3
2
5
4
7
6(1,2)
(1,2)
(4,1)
(4,3)
(1,2)
(1,3)
(1,2)
(1,5)
(1,1) (1,2)
(1,1)(1,2)
(2,2)(2,1)
(1,1)
{0,15} {0,10}
{0,10}{0,15}
{0,-}
{0,-}
{15+93,120} (3,2) (3,2)
Damaged road network (missing 4->5)
Specific OMTD theoriesExample (emergency evacuation)
TET1 AET1 TET2 AET2
Damaged network 11 7.27 60 36.74Predefined network 9 6.8 46 30.27Flow pattern planning without design
7 5.4 28 20.18
Integrated design and flow pattern planning
6 5 23 17.55
1st Category 2nd Category
TET: Total evacuation time; AET: Average evacuation time
Conclusions
1. A new theory for having a dynamic system makes sense for further improving the performance of a dynamic system
2. The new theory is applicable to any type of dynamic systems
3. A complete analogy presents between time dependent force driven dynamic system and event dependent profit driven dynamic system
4. The above analogy helps develop theories for the latter system by learning the former system