Interval arithmetic approach to qualitative physics: Static systems

1993 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-Chen Chang ◽  
Cheng-Ching Yu ◽  
Ching-Tien Liou
1975 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
pp. 395-407
Author(s):  
S. Henriksen

The first question to be answered, in seeking coordinate systems for geodynamics, is: what is geodynamics? The answer is, of course, that geodynamics is that part of geophysics which is concerned with movements of the Earth, as opposed to geostatics which is the physics of the stationary Earth. But as far as we know, there is no stationary Earth – epur sic monere. So geodynamics is actually coextensive with geophysics, and coordinate systems suitable for the one should be suitable for the other. At the present time, there are not many coordinate systems, if any, that can be identified with a static Earth. Certainly the only coordinate of aeronomic (atmospheric) interest is the height, and this is usually either as geodynamic height or as pressure. In oceanology, the most important coordinate is depth, and this, like heights in the atmosphere, is expressed as metric depth from mean sea level, as geodynamic depth, or as pressure. Only for the earth do we find “static” systems in use, ana even here there is real question as to whether the systems are dynamic or static. So it would seem that our answer to the question, of what kind, of coordinate systems are we seeking, must be that we are looking for the same systems as are used in geophysics, and these systems are dynamic in nature already – that is, their definition involvestime.


Computing ◽  
1979 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Ichida ◽  
Y. Fujii

Author(s):  
Eric Coatane´a ◽  
Tuomas Ritola ◽  
Irem Y. Tumer ◽  
David Jensen

In this paper, a design-stage failure identification framework is proposed using a modeling and simulation approach based on Dimensional Analysis and qualitative physics. The proposed framework is intended to provide a new approach to model the behavior in the Functional-Failure Identification and Propagation (FFIP) framework, which estimates potential faults and their propagation paths under critical event scenarios. The initial FFIP framework is based on combining hierarchical system models of functionality and configuration, with behavioral simulation and qualitative reasoning. This paper proposes to develop a behavioral model derived from information available at the configuration level. Specifically, the new behavioral model uses design variables, which are associated with units and quantities (i.e., Mass, Length, Time, etc…). The proposed framework continues the work to allow the analysis of functional failures and fault propagation at a highly abstract system concept level before any potentially high-cost design commitments are made. The main contribution in this paper consists of developing component behavioral models based on the combination of fundamental design variables used to describe components and their units or quantities, more precisely describing components’ behavior.


2006 ◽  
Vol 351 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hervé Brönnimann ◽  
Guillaume Melquiond ◽  
Sylvain Pion
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document