Integration of SysML and Virtual Reality Environment: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 3 by Camila Xu and Version 2 by Mostafa Lutfi.

In recent years, Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) has continued to develop as a standard for designing, managing, and maintaining increasingly complex systems. Unlike the document centric approach, MBSE puts the model at the heart of system design. Among the various MBSE language development efforts, “Systems Modeling Language (SysML)”, is the most anticipated and broadly utilized in the research and in industrial practice. SysML originated from Unified Modeling Language (UML) and follows the Object-Oriented Systems Engineering Method (OOSEM). SysML diagrams help users create various systems engineering artifacts, including requirements, use cases, operational concepts, system architecture, system behaviors, and parametric analyses of a system model. In the early days of implementation, MBSE languages, including SysML, typically relied on static viewpoints and limited simulation support to depict and analyze a system model. Due the continuous improvement efforts and new implementation approaches by researchers and organizations, SysML has advanced vastly to encompass dynamic viewpoints, in-situ simulation and enable integration with external modeling and simulation (M&S) tools. Virtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a user interactive and immersive visualization technology and can depict reality in a virtual environment at different levels of fidelity. VR can play a crucial role in developing dynamic and interactive viewpoints to improve the MBSE approach. In this research paper, the authors developed and implemented a methodology for integrating SysML and VR, enabling tools to achieve three dimensional viewpoints, an immersive user experience and early design evaluations of the system of interest (SOI). 

  • virtual reality (VR)
  • systems modeling language (SysML)
  • model based systems engineering (MBSE)

1. Introduction

According to the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), “Systems Engineering is a transdisciplinary and integrative approach to enable the successful realization, use, and retirement of engineered systems, using systems principles and concepts, and scientific, technological, and management methods” [1]. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) focuses on formalized applications of modeling to support systems engineering artifacts development from the conceptual design phase throughout the end of the system of interest (SOI) lifecycle [2]. In his 1993 book, “Model Based Systems Engineering”, Dr. Wayne Wymore first introduced the term “MBSE” [3]. Systems engineers are living in a generation wherein modern systems are growing in complexity [4,5][4][5]. MBSE is the proposed solution by the researchers to cope with system complexity in a variety of SOI [6,7][6][7]. Various MBSE methodologies have been developed in recent years. The most notable ones are Object Oriented Systems Engineering Method (OOSEM), Object Process Methodology (OPM), State Analysis, IBM Harmony and Arcadia-Capella [8,9][8][9]. Among these, OOSEM-based SysML has better tool support than any other MBSE methodologies available [10,11][10][11]. In fact, SysML has emerged as the de facto standard system modeling language for MBSE [12,13][12][13]. According to Friedenthal, Moore, and Steiner, “SysML is a general-purpose graphical modeling language that supports the analysis, specification, design, verification, and validation for complex systems” [14]. SysML is owned and published by the Object Management Group, Inc. (OMG) [15]. SysML is a derivation of UML, developed in the 1990s as a general-purpose language for software engineering [16]. SysML consists of nine diagram types, namely Package Diagram, Requirements Diagram, Block Definition Diagram (BDD), Internal Block Diagram (IBD), Use Case Diagram, Activity Diagram, State Machine Diagram, Sequence Diagram, and Parametric Diagram (see Figure 1) [15].
Systems 11 00189 g001 550
Figure 1.
SysML diagram taxonomy [17].
VR is one of the major technologies with the utmost anticipated potential for growth, especially in the fields of engineering, education, gaming, cinematography and healthcare [18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25]. For example, different engineering fields leveraged VR technologies to accomplish various tasks, such as VR based Civil Engineering training, Industry 4.0 implementation, and Aerospace training [26,27,28,29,30,31,32][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]. Coates et al. defined VR as an electronic simulation of environments with head mounted display and wired outfit, which allows the end user to interact with lifelike 3D environments [33]. A typical VR system consists of the following key components: VR implementation software, Head Mounted Display (HMD), base station, tracking sensors, feedback devices, on board/external computers and users [34,35,36][34][35][36].
Though SysML application has been widespread in recent years, it has not been fully adopted by organizations. In addition, stakeholders may not have knowledge of SysML [37]. External product suppliers do not have SysML software knowledge and often ask for Excel/Word documents for data exchanges. Hence, system engineers still need to generate documents from the SysML system model to present the work in front of non-technical audiences. Therefore, there is a need for automatic data extraction from SysML models to facilitate model demonstration to technical and non-technical stakeholders alike.
To date, SysML models have mostly been used to define requirements, use cases, system architectures, system behaviors, and task sequences through static viewpoints and elements. In recent years, researchers have incorporated simulation analysis within SysML models to enable system requirements verification and design evaluation [38,39][38][39]. However, very few studies have focused on the integration of VR tools with SysML models. Recent studies indicate that VR-supported immersive design review allows participants to identify more issues/faults in design, improve collaborative engagement, focus and presence as compared to non-immersive methods [40,41][40][41]. Moreover, VR environments are beneficial for visualizing complex structures and provide higher levels of understanding and knowledge retention than the conventional approaches [42,43,44][42][43][44]. Recent case studies/evaluations by the researchers showed that VR environment translation of visual formalisms (similar to SysML) resulted in enhanced collaboration, learning and understanding among the users/stakeholders. For example, multiple studies have confirmed that 3D VR environments significantly increase the processes of knowledge retention and the collaborative process modeling experience of Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) [45,46,47][45][46][47]. Similarly, modeling 3D UML diagrams in a virtual environment resulted in faster model comprehension and a more enjoyable modeling experience than 2D diagrams [48,49][48][49]. Based on the above study results, it can be elicited that visualization of 2D SysML diagrams in a 3D VR environment can improve model understanding, especially of complex systems, and facilitate a better collaborative environment among users and stakeholders.
VR technology can help visualize the system architecture, facilitate virtual storytelling, verify system requirements and evaluate product/service performance early in the lifecycle of a SOI. For example, a system engineer can evaluate system architecture (e.g., Telescope Mount System) in a 3D virtual environment and, based on their understanding of the system, modify/refine the architecture early in the design phase. In addition, external stakeholders with minimal technical knowledge can be immersed into a 3D virtual environment and experience use case scenarios of proposed designs. As a result, there is a need for interoperability between 3D VR models and SysML models to enable data exchange and review to systems engineering artifacts such as use cases, requirements, operational concepts, system architecture, etc.
In addition, use of Digital Twin (DT) technologies in systems engineering projects have been increasing in recent years. DT as a concept was first introduced by Michael Grieves as a virtual representation of an actual component that can be used to emulate the same behavior as that of its real world counterpart [50]. However, the term “Digital Twin” first appeared in National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) draft technological roadmap published in 2010 [51]. Over the last two decades, literature and research in the field has evolved to produce a wide variety of DT definitions and methodologies [52]. To simplify the ambiguity, a DT can be defined as a digital or virtual model of a real-world object (system, component, part, process, human, etc.) representative of the exact or future state of its physical twin via real time data exchange as well as keeping records of historical data [53]. Virtual models can be developed using a variety of methods, including VR, Augmented Reality (AR), Mixed Reality (MR), dashboard technologies and 2D simulations, etc. [54,55,56,57,58,59][54][55][56][57][58][59]. For example, developers can fabricate an entire machine in a digital environment and test their high-level control mechanism in a VR environment; manufacturing engineers can utilize dashboards to analyze the production process in real time and make necessary adjustments. Data exchanges between real and virtual counterparts of a DT infrastructure are achieved through internal/external sensors connected to physical systems and communication networks [58]. Recently, few DT frameworks have emerged where VR environments co-exist with other DT infrastructure and support validation of the digital/virtual configurations before the physical twin implementation [60,61][60][61]. The integration of MBSE tools and DT infrastructure can present several opportunities for systems engineers to test and visualize large models [62,63][62][63]. Both the physical and virtual models can be integrated with a shared MBSE repository (e.g., SysML model), which will act as a communication hub between DT infrastructure and systems engineering activities [63]. Moreover, MBSE efforts can introduce early DT development in a program’s lifecycle [64]. Therefore, integration of SysML models with VR tools is one of the key steps in establishing synergy between DT and MBSE.

2. Integration of SysML and Virtual Reality Environment

The authors believe there are limited studies available in MBSE research which emphasize integration of VR environments with SysML tools. In his thesis paper, Kande proposed an integration methodology of Virtual Engineering (VE) suite with the SysML model, providing a graphical interface to demonstrate the system of interest and operations [65]. He created a fermenter analysis model using Computer Aided Design (CAD) data and analyzed the effects of changes in design parameters on system performance. To enable effective communication of systems engineering artifacts to the non-engineering disciplines, Madni mapped systems engineering (SE) artifacts modeled in SysML to virtual worlds, within which different storylines can unfold [66]. In addition, he combined MBSE + frameworks (MBSE and storytelling in VR) and Experimental Design Language (EDL) to enable early participation and collaboration of the stakeholders in the system design [67]. Abidi et al. proposed an interactive VR simulation to encompass real time simulation of production flows in a lean manufacturing industry through communication between ARENA and Virtual Environment by utilizing SysML based transformation and Real Time Infrastructure (RTI) [68]. Mahboob et al. proposed a concept for a user- and task-centric model for product development in the VR environment. In that research proposal, SysML was used to separate isolated model components into products, actors and behaviors of a specific use case, and then those model components were combined to build the use case-specific scenario in VR [69]. Sanvordenker visualized a self-driving truck’s SysML model in a VR environment by extracting SysML model diagrams, representing them in a browser, and finally embedding the web browser inside a Unity scene through a custom plugin [70]. Oberhauser demonstrated a solution concept for visualizing and interacting with SysML models as stacked hyperplanes in a VR environment [71]. However, in the above research there are some limitations. Namely, requiring extensive manual effort to set up each of the simulation components and frequent changes in the interface files (e.g., dynamic link library) to enable seamless data exchange. Furthermore, the VR diagrams used in these studies were more complex (e.g., stacked hyperplanes) instead of being easily comprehendible and their methodologies involved far-reaching conversions of models (XMI conversion, MASCARET, etc.). Those complex design techniques may hinder the mass use of VR-enabled SysML due to the time and effort needed to set up those systems.

References

  1. INCOSE. System and SE Definitions. Available online: https://www.incose.org/about-systems-engineering/system-and-se-definition/system-and-se-definitions (accessed on 26 January 2023).
  2. Hart, L. Introduction to model-based system engineering (MBSE) and SysML. In Proceedings of the Delaware Valley Chapter Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 26 April 2015; p. 43.
  3. Wymore, L.A.W. Model-Based Systems Engineering; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1993.
  4. Honour, E. Systems Engineering and Complexity. Insight 2008, 11, 20–21.
  5. Calvano, C.N.; John, P. Systems engineering in an age of complexity. Syst. Eng. 2004, 7, 25–34.
  6. French, M.O. Extending model based systems engineering for complex systems. In Proceedings of the 53rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, FL, USA, 5–9 January 2015.
  7. Alvarez, J.L.; Metselaar, H.; Amiaux, J.; Criado, G.S.; Venancio, L.M.G.; Salvignol, J.-C.; Laureijs, R.J.; Vavrek, R. Model-based system engineering approach for the Euclid mission to manage scientific and technical complexity. Model. Syst. Eng. Proj. Manag. Astron. VII 2016, 9911, 99110C.
  8. Estefan, J.A. Survey of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Methodologies; INCOSE MBSE Initiative: San Diego, CA, USA, 2008; p. 70.
  9. Roques, P. MBSE with the ARCADIA method and the capella tool. In Proceedings of the 8th European Congress on Embedded Real Time Software and Systems (ERTS 2016), Toulouse, France, 27–29 January 2016; Available online: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01258014 (accessed on 8 August 2021).
  10. Object-Oriented SE Method, Default. Available online: https://www.incose.org/incose-member-resources/working-groups/transformational/object-oriented-se-method (accessed on 17 September 2021).
  11. Free, Open Source & Commercial MBSE + SysML Tools—MBSE Tool Reviews. Available online: https://mbsetoolreviews.com/ (accessed on 17 September 2021).
  12. Delligatti, SysML Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Systems Modeling Language|Pearson. Available online: https://www.pearson.com/us/higher-education/program/Delligatti-Sys-ML-Distilled-A-Brief-Guide-to-the-Systems-Modeling-Language/PGM259527.html (accessed on 8 August 2021).
  13. Wolny, S.; Mazak, A.; Carpella, C.; Geist, V.; Wimmer, M. Thirteen years of SysML: A systematic mapping study. Softw. Syst. Model. 2020, 19, 111–169.
  14. Friedenthal, S.; Moore, A.; Steiner, R. A Practical Guide to SysML: The Systems Modeling Language; Morgan Kaufmann: Burlington, MA, USA, 2014.
  15. OMG SysML Home|OMG Systems Modeling Language. Available online: https://www.omgsysml.org/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
  16. Erickson, J.; Siau, K. Unified modeling language: The teen years and growing pains. In Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Interaction Design; Yamamoto, S., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; Volume 8016, pp. 295–304.
  17. What is SysML?|OMG SysML. Available online: https://www.omgsysml.org/what-is-sysml.htm (accessed on 26 June 2022).
  18. Berni, A.; Borgianni, Y. Applications of Virtual Reality in Engineering and Product Design: Why, What, How, When and Where. Electronics 2020, 9, 1064.
  19. Williams, E.; Love, C.; Love, M. Virtual Reality Cinema: Narrative Tips and Techniques; Routledge: England, UK, 2021.
  20. Dowling, D.; Fearghail, C.O.; Smolic, A.; Knorr, S. Faoladh: A case study in cinematic VR storytelling and production. In Proceedings of the Interactive Storytelling: 11th International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling, ICIDS 2018, Dublin, Ireland, 5–8 December 2018; Proceedings 11. pp. 359–362.
  21. Haluck, R.S. Computers and Virtual Reality for Surgical Education in the 21st Century. Arch. Surg. 2000, 135, 786–792.
  22. Rivas, Y.C.; Valdivieso, P.A.V.; Rodriguez, M.A.Y. Virtual reality and 21st century education. Int. Res. J. Manag. IT Soc. Sci. 2020, 7, 37–44.
  23. Ma, M.; Jain, L.C.; Anderson, P. Future trends of virtual, augmented reality, and games for health. In Virtual, Augmented Reality and Serious Games for Healthcare 1; Ma, M., Jain, L.C., Anderson, P., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–6.
  24. Papanastasiou, G.; Drigas, A.; Skianis, C.; Lytras, M.; Papanastasiou, E. Virtual and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’ twenty-first century skills. Virtual Real. 2019, 23, 425–436.
  25. Wang, P.; Wu, P.; Wang, J.; Chi, H.L.; Wang, X. A critical review of the use of virtual reality in construction engineering education and training. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1204.
  26. Dinis, F.M.; Guimarães, A.S.; Carvalho, B.R.; Martins, J.P.P. Virtual and augmented reality game-based applications to civil engineering education. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Athens, Greece, 26–28 April 2017; pp. 1683–1688.
  27. Hilfert, T.; König, M. Low-cost virtual reality environment for engineering and construction. Vis. Eng. 2016, 4, 2.
  28. Bai, C.; Dallasega, P.; Orzes, G.; Sarkis, J. Industry 4.0 technologies assessment: A sustainability perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 229, 107776.
  29. Salah, B.; Abidi, M.H.; Mian, S.H.; Krid, M.; Alkhalefah, H.; Abdo, A. Virtual Reality-Based Engineering Education to Enhance Manufacturing Sustainability in Industry 4.0. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1477.
  30. Stone, R.J.; Panfilov, P.B.; Shukshunov, V.E. Evolution of aerospace simulation: From immersive Virtual Reality to serious games. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Recent Advances in Space Technologies—RAST2011, Istanbul, Turkey, 9–11 June 2011; pp. 655–662.
  31. Fussell, S.G.; Truong, D. Using virtual reality for dynamic learning: An extended technology acceptance model. Virtual Real. 2022, 26, 249–267.
  32. Lee, H.; Woo, D.; Yu, S. Virtual Reality Metaverse System Supplementing Remote Education Methods: Based on Aircraft Maintenance Simulation. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 2667.
  33. Steuer, J. Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. J. Commun. 1992, 42, 73–93.
  34. Biocca, F. Virtual Reality Technology: A Tutorial. J. Commun. 1992, 42, 23–72.
  35. Maheepala, M.; Kouzani, A.Z.; Joordens, M.A. Light-Based Indoor Positioning Systems: A Review. IEEE Sens. J. 2020, 20, 3971–3995.
  36. Bamodu, O.; Ye, X.M. Virtual Reality and Virtual Reality System Components. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 765–767, 1169–1172.
  37. Patterson, E.A. Utilizing SysML Viewpoints to Improve Understanding and Communication of Human Mental Models Within System Design Teams; The University of Alabama in Huntsville: Huntsville, AL, USA, 2017.
  38. Karban, R.; Jankevičius, N.; Elaasar, M. Esem: Automated systems analysis using executable SysML modeling patterns. In Proceedings of the INCOSE International Symposium, Edinburgh, Scotland, 18–21 July 2016; Volume 26, Number 1. pp. 1–24.
  39. Karban, R.; Dekens, F.G.; Herzig, S.; Elaasar, M.; Jankevičius, N. Creating system engineering products with executable models in a model-based engineering environment. In Proceedings of the Modeling, Systems Engineering, and Project Management for Astronomy VII, Edinburgh, UK, 26–28 June 2016; Volume 9911, pp. 96–111.
  40. Tea, S.; Panuwatwanich, K.; Ruthankoon, R.; Kaewmoracharoen, M. Multiuser immersive virtual reality application for real-time remote collaboration to enhance design review process in the social distancing era. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2022, 20, 281–298.
  41. Wolfartsberger, J. Analyzing the potential of Virtual Reality for engineering design review. Autom. Constr. 2019, 104, 27–37.
  42. Shao, X.; Yuan, Q.; Qian, D.; Ye, Z.; Chen, G.; Le Zhuang, K.; Jiang, X.; Jin, Y.; Qiang, D. Virtual reality technology for teaching neurosurgery of skull base tumor. BMC Med. Educ. 2020, 20, 3.
  43. Brown, C.E.; Alrmuny, D.; Williams, M.K.; Whaley, B.; Hyslop, R.M. Visualizing molecular structures and shapes: A comparison of virtual reality, computer simulation, and traditional modeling. Chem. Teach. Int. 2020, 3, 69–80.
  44. Ferrell, J.B.; Campbell, J.P.; McCarthy, D.R.; McKay, K.T.; Hensinger, M.; Srinivasan, R.; Zhao, X.; Wurthmann, A.; Li, J.; Schneebeli, S.T. Chemical Exploration with Virtual Reality in Organic Teaching Laboratories. J. Chem. Educ. 2019, 96, 1961–1966.
  45. Pöhler, L.; Schuir, J.; Lübbers, S.; Teuteberg, F. Enabling collaborative business process elicitation in virtual environments. In Proceedings of the Business Modeling and Software Design: 10th International Symposium, BMSD 2020, Berlin, Germany, 6–8 July 2020; Proceedings 10. pp. 375–385.
  46. Leyer, M.; Brown, R.; Aysolmaz, B.; Vanderfeesten, I.; Turetken, O. 3D virtual world BPM training systems: Process gateway experimental results. In Proceedings of the Advanced Information Systems Engineering: 31st International Conference, CAiSE 2019, Rome, Italy, 3–7 June 2019; Proceedings 31. pp. 415–429.
  47. West, S.; Brown, R.; Recker, J. Collaborative business process modeling using 3D virtual environments. In Proceedings of the 16th Americas Conference on Information Systems: Sustainable IT Collaboration around the Globe, Lima, Peru, 12–15 August 2010; pp. 1–11.
  48. Oberhauser, R. VR-UML: The unified modeling language in virtual reality—An immersive modeling experience. In Proceedings of the Business Modeling and Software Design: 11th International Symposium, BMSD 2021, Sofia, Bulgaria, 5–7 July 2021; Proceedings 11. pp. 40–58.
  49. Reuter, R.; Hauser, F.; Muckelbauer, D.; Stark, T.; Antoni, E.; Mottok, J.; Wolff, C. Using augmented reality in software engineering education? First insights to a comparative study of 2D and AR UML modeling. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Grand Wailea, HI, USA, 8–11 January 2019.
  50. Grieves, M. Digital twin: Manufacturing excellence through virtual factory replication. White Pap. 2014, 1, 1–7.
  51. Shafto, M.; Conroy, M.; Doyle, R.; Glaessgen, E.; Kemp, C.; LeMoigne, J.; Wang, L. Draft modeling, simulation, information technology & processing roadmap. Natl. Aeronaut. Space Adm. 2012, 2010, 11.
  52. Barricelli, B.R.; Casiraghi, E.; Fogli, D. A Survey on Digital Twin: Definitions, Characteristics, Applications, and Design Implications. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 167653–167671.
  53. Singh, M.; Fuenmayor, E.; Hinchy, E.P.; Qiao, Y.; Murray, N.; Devine, D. Digital Twin: Origin to Future. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2021, 4, 36.
  54. Kaarlela, T.; Pieskä, S.; Pitkäaho, T. Digital twin and virtual reality for safety training. In Proceedings of the 2020 11th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications, (CogInfoCom), Mariehamn, Finland, 23–25 September 2020; pp. 000115–000120.
  55. Tu, X.; Autiosalo, J.; Jadid, A.; Tammi, K.; Klinker, G. A Mixed Reality Interface for a Digital Twin Based Crane. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 9480.
  56. Sepasgozar, S.M.E. Digital Twin and Web-Based Virtual Gaming Technologies for Online Education: A Case of Construction Management and Engineering. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4678.
  57. Choi, S.H.; Park, K.-B.; Roh, D.H.; Lee, J.Y.; Mohammed, M.; Ghasemi, Y.; Jeong, H. An integrated mixed reality system for safety-aware human-robot collaboration using deep learning and digital twin generation. Robot. Comput. Manuf. 2022, 73, 102258.
  58. Wang, K.-J.; Lee, Y.-H.; Angelica, S. Digital twin design for real-time monitoring—A case study of die cutting machine. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2021, 59, 6471–6485.
  59. Liu, Y.K.; Ong, S.K.; Nee, A.Y.C. State-of-the-art survey on digital twin implementations. Adv. Manuf. 2022, 10, 1–23.
  60. Pérez, L.; Rodríguez-Jiménez, S.; Rodríguez, N.; Usamentiaga, R.; García, D.F. Digital Twin and Virtual Reality Based Methodology for Multi-Robot Manufacturing Cell Commissioning. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 3633.
  61. Havard, V.; Jeanne, B.; Lacomblez, M.; Baudry, D. Digital twin and virtual reality: A co-simulation environment for design and assessment of industrial workstations. Prod. Manuf. Res. 2019, 7, 472–489.
  62. Brusa, E. Digital Twin: Toward the Integration Between System Design and RAMS Assessment Through the Model-Based Systems Engineering. IEEE Syst. J. 2021, 15, 3549–3560.
  63. Madni, A.M.; Madni, C.C.; Lucero, S.D. Leveraging Digital Twin Technology in Model-Based Systems Engineering. Systems 2019, 7, 7.
  64. Bickford, J.; Van Bossuyt, D.L.; Beery, P.; Pollman, A. Operationalizing digital twins through model-based systems engineering methods. Syst. Eng. 2020, 23, 724–750.
  65. Kande, A. Integration of Model-Based Systems Engineering and Virtual Engineering Tools for Detailed Design. Master’s Thesis, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO, USA, 2011; p. 79.
  66. Madni, A.M. Expanding Stakeholder Participation in Upfront System Engineering through Storytelling in Virtual Worlds. Syst. Eng. 2015, 18, 16–27.
  67. Madni, A.M.; Nance, M.; Richey, M.; Hubbard, W.; Hanneman, L. Toward an Experiential Design Language: Augmenting Model-based Systems Engineering with Technical Storytelling in Virtual Worlds. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2014, 28, 848–856.
  68. Abidi, M.A.; Lyonnet, B.; Chevaillier, P.; Toscano, R. Contribution of virtual reality for lines production’s simulation in a lean manufacturing environment. Simulation 2016, 9, 11.
  69. Mahboob, A.; Weber, C.; Husung, S.; Liebal, A.; Krömker, H. Model based systems engineering (MBSE) approach for configurable product use-case scenarios in virtual environments, DS 87-3. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17) Vol. 3: Product, Services and Systems Design, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 21–25 August 2017.
  70. Sanvordenker, R. Visualization and Testing of an Autonomously Driving Truck’s Sysml Models in a Virtual 3D Simulation Environment. Master’s Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 13 August 2020.
  71. Oberhauser, R. VR-SysML: SysML model visualization and immersion in virtual reality. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Modern Systems Engineering Solutions (MODERN SYSTEMS 2022), IARIA, Nice, France, 24–28 July 2022; pp. 59–64.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback