Towards a framework for concurrent design

  • Sarosh N. Talukdar
  • Steven J. Fenves
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 492)


By a “framework for concurrent design” we mean three things: (1) formal ways of stating the problems of concurrent design, (2) visualization (conceptualization) aids to help devise strategies for solving these problems, and (3) implementation aids to help translate the strategies into working systems.

This paper begins by defining some terms, including “conflict,” and “computational path.” Next, concurrent design problems are formulated in these terms. Specifically, these problems are shown to be equivalent to finding computational paths that avoid or eliminate conflicts and connect given data-objects to desired data-objects. A class of graphs, called TAO graphs, is developed for visualizing such paths. Finally, a computational environment, called FORS, is described for implementing selected paths.


Automobile Part Construction Planning Concurrent Design Computational Path Conflict Resolver 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. N. Talukdar, S. S. Pyo and Ravi Mehrotra, “Distributed Processors for Numerically Intense Problems”, Final Report for EPRI Project RP 1764-3, March, 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Petter Stoa, Sarosh Talukdar, Richard Christie, Lily Hou and Nikolaos Papanikolopoulos, “Environments for Security Assessment and Enhancement,” presented at the Second Symposium on Expert Systems Applications to Power Systems (ESAPS'89), Seattle, WA, July 17–20, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mark Sapossnek, Sarosh Talukdar, Alberto Elfes, Sergio Sedas, Moshe Eisenberger, and Lily Hou, “Design Critics in the Computer-aided Simultaneous Engineering (CASE) Project,” Technical Report, EDRC, Carnegie Mellon University, 1989, presented at ASME Winter Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA., Dec. 11–14, '89.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    James Daniell and Steven W. Director, “An Object Oriented Approach to CAD Tool Control Within a Design Framework,” Technical Report, EDRC, Carnegie Mellon University, Nov. 18, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Proceedings of the AAAI and Boeing Workshop on Blackboard Systems: Implementation Issues, Seattle, WA, July 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    N. Papanikolopolous, “FORS: Flexible Organizations,” MS Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Cardozo, “DPSK: A Kernel for Distributed Problem Solving,” Ph.D. Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    N. Vidovic, D. Siewiorek, and F. Newberry, “A Graph Based Environment,” Technical Report CMUCAD-87, 1987.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarosh N. Talukdar
    • 1
  • Steven J. Fenves
    • 1
  1. 1.Engineering Design Research CenterCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburgh

Personalised recommendations