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: zhangwjchris@gmail.com

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