Product design and diagnosis are, today, worlds apart. Despite strong areas of overlap at the ontological level, traditional design process theory and practice does not recognize diagnosis as a part of the modeling process chain; neither do diagnosis knowledge engineering processes reference design modeling tasks as a source of knowledge acquisition. This paper presents the DAEDALUS knowledge engineering framework as a methodology for integrating design and diagnosis tasks, models, and modeling environments around a common Domain Ontology and Product Models Library. The approach organizes domain knowledge around the execution of a set of tasks in an enterprise product engineering task workflow. Each task employs a Task Application which uses a customized subset of the Domain Ontology—the Task Ontology—to construct a graphical Product Model. The Ontology is used to populate the models with relevant concepts (variables) and relations (relationships), thus serving as a concept dictionary-style mechanism for knowledge sharing and reuse across the different Task Applications. For inferencing, each task employs a local Problem-solving Method (PSM), and a Model-PSM Mapping, which operate on the local Product Model to produce reasoning outcomes. The use of a common Domain Ontology across tasks and models facilitates semantic consistency of variables and relations in constructing Bayesian networks for design and diagnosis.

The approach is motivated by inefficiencies encountered in cleanly exchanging and integrating design FMEA and diagnosis models. Demonstration software under development is intended to illustrate how the DAEDALUS framework can be applied to knowledge sharing and exchange between Bayesian network-based design FMEA and diagnosis modeling tasks. Anticipated limitations of the DAEDALUS methodology are discussed, as is its relationship to Tomiyama's Knowledge Intensive Engineering Framework (KIEF). DAEDALUS is grounded in formal knowledge engineering principles and methodologies established during the past decade. Finally, the framework is presented as one possible approach for improved integration of generalized design and diagnostic modeling and knowledge exchange.