Normalize the Behavior Model about fta-fmea HOT 4 CLOSED

There some minor problems with this pull request.

• the description field should be added to the behavior class and removed in inheriting classes.
• Behavior.impairedBehaviors should use the impairs relationship instead of impairedBy IRI.

Refactoring of code using the old model:

• in FailureModesTableRepositoryService.computeTableRows line 144, there is a question regarding mitigation. The mitigation is a behavior which impairs the failure mode. For now select those behaviors that impair the failure mode and are of the mitigation type.
• FaultTreeRepositoryService.transferBehaviorToFaultEvent - the required behaviors of the input behavior are assigned to the newly created failureMode. This is not correct if the behavior is a function. In this case the function's requirements should not be added as requirements to the newly created failure mode.
• FunctionRepositoryService.deleteFunction(URI functionUri, URI dependentBehaviorUri) - refactor/rename this method and the second parameter to FunctionRepositoryService.deleteRequiredBehavior(URI functionUri, URI requiredFunction).

Some code is not code is not compilable due chnages in the model. Resolve compilation errors in:

• FaultEventRepositoryServiceTest.addFailureMode_shouldSetData_shouldUpdateEvent
• FaultEventRepositoryServiceTest.deleteFailureMode_shouldRemoveFromEventFromFailureModeEffects

from fta-fmea.

"Behavior.impairedBehaviors should use the impairs relationship instead of impairedBy IRI."
I coded that from the other direction -> that means for example: Function is impaired by FailureMode and not FailureMode impairs Function. But i can rewrite it, theres no problem with that.

from fta-fmea.

Regarding the Behavior.impairedBehaviors IRI

The issue was that the label of the field was inconsistent with the mapped IRI. Now the naming convention is ok. For reference, the correct association with field names and IRIs is:

• "impairedBehaviors" with IRI "impairs" and
• "impairingBehavoirs" with "impairedBy".

from fta-fmea.

I found some additional issues with this pull request.

Fix Naming Convention

• accessor methods of Beavior.manifestations field - refactor/rename the accessor methods from add/removeManifestationBehavior to either add/removeManifestation to consistent with the getter and setter methods of the field.

Fix the Event-Behavior Relationship

• add behavior field to the Event class. This is necessary because both sides of the relationships are used in the code.
• revize usage of both sides of the event-behavior relationship. Make sure that setting the relationship is done on the side of the Event as it has one reference to a behavior.
• Implement the setter method of the behavior in the Event class to update the other side of the relationship, i.e. the Behavior.manifestations field.

from fta-fmea.