An Assistance Tool to Design Interoperable Components for Co-simulation

  • Yassine MotieEmail author
  • Alexandre Nketsa
  • Philippe Truillet
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 146)


The high number of electronic devices used and their interactions lead us to the transition from a vision of multi-functions systems, used independently, to systems that are actually distributed and scattered in the environment. The heterogeneity of the components constituting some of these systems ultimately leads to call them “complex”. When a complex system [1] requires the use of different components specified by different designers working on different domains, this greatly increases the number of virtual prototypes. Unfortunately, these components tend to remain too independent of one another, thus preventing both the designers from collaborating and their system from being interconnected in order to full one or more tasks that could not be performed by one of these elements only.

The need for communication and co-operation is necessary and encourages the designer (s) to inter-operate them for the implementation of a co-simulation [2] encouraging dialogue between disciplines and reducing errors, costs and Development time.

In this article, we describe an assistance tool in order to generate black-box components, facilitating this design task for novices.


Complex systems Models FMI Co-simulation Component generation 


  1. 1.
    Bar-Yam, Y.: Dynamics of Complex Systems, vol. 213. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rowson, J.A.: Hardware/software co-simulation. In: DAC, vol. 94, pp. 6–10, June 1994Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boer, C.A., Verbraeck, A.: Distributed simulation and manufacturing: distributed simulation with cots simulation packages. In: Proceedings of the 35th Conference on Winter Simulation: Driving Innovation. Winter Simulation Conference, pp. 829–837 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gleizes, M.-P., et al.: Neocampus: a demonstrator of connected, innovative, intelligent and sustainable campus. In: International Conference on Intelligent Interactive Multimedia Systems and Services, pp. 482–491. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Motie, Y., et al.: A co-simulation framework interoperability for Neo-campus project (regular paper). In: European Simulation and Modelling Conference (ESM), Lisbon, 25/10/2017-27/10/2017. EUROSIS, 2017Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Taylor, S.J., et al.: “Integrating heterogeneous distributed cots discrete-event simulation packages: an emerging standards-based approach. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. IEEE Trans. on 36(1), 109–122 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abras, C., Maloney-Krichmar, D., Preece, J.: User-centered design. Bainbridge, W. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications 37(4), 445–456 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, W., Huhn, M., Fritzson, P.: A generic FMU interface for Modelica. In: 4th International Workshop on Equation-Based Object-Oriented Modeling Languages and Tools, pp. 19–24 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noll, C., Blochwitz, T.: Implementation of modelisar functional mock-up interfaces in SimulationX. In: 8th International Modelica Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elsheikh, A., Awais, M.U., Widl, E., Palensky, P.: Modelica-enabled rapid prototyping of cyber-physical energy systems via the functional mockup interface. In: 2013 Workshop on Modeling and Simulation of Cyber-Physical Energy SystemsMSCPES 2013, pp. 1–6 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Qtronic: FMU SDK: free development kit (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/TR 16982. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction–Usability Methods Supporting Human-Centred Design (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boy, G.A.: The group elicitation method for participatory design and usability testing. interactions 4(2), 27–33 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rettig, M.: Prototyping for tiny fingers. Commun. ACM 37(4), 21–27 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Snyder, C.: Paper prototyping: the fast and easy way to design and refine user interfaces. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kelley, J.F.: An iterative design methodology for user-friendly natural language office information applications. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. (TOIS) 2(1), 26–41 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Serrano, M., Nigay, L.: OpenWizard: une approche pour la création et l’évaluation rapide de prototypes multimodaux. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Association Francophone d’Interaction Homme-Machine, pp. 101–109. ACM, October 2009Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sefelin, R., Tscheligi, M., Giller, V.: Paper prototyping-what is it good for?: a comparison of paper-and computer-based low-fidelity prototyping. In: CHI’03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 778–779. ACM, April 2003Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hippmann, G., Arnold, M., Schittenhelm, M.: Efficient simulation of bush and roller chain drives. In: Proceedings in Multibody Dynamics, ECCOMAS Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Blochwitz, T., et al.: Functional Mockup Interface 2.0: The Standard for Tool independent Exchange of Simulation Models. In: Proceedings of the 9th International MODELICA Conference, pp. 173-184, 3–5 September 2012.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yassine Motie
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alexandre Nketsa
    • 1
  • Philippe Truillet
    • 1
  1. 1.LAAS-IRITUniversity of Toulouse IIIToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations