Advertisement

Integrating part modeling and assembly modeling from the perspective of process

  • Zhi-Jia Xu
  • Pan Wang
  • Qing-Hui Wang
  • Jing-Rong Li
Article

Abstract

Part modeling and assembly modeling are two important aspects of product modeling, which is crucial to manufacturing industrial completeness. Although the two aspects are greatly integrated, they are separated at the process level in current CAD systems. As a result, the design intent expressed at part modeling stage has to be expressed again at assembly modeling stage, through tedious and error-prone manual selection of geometric entities and assignment of mating constraints. To alleviate the problems, an approach to integrate part modeling and assembly modeling from the perspective of process is proposed. In this method, the previously developed concept of assembly feature pair (AFP), and the recently generalized and formalized phenomenon of structure pre-mapping (SPM) are introduced; AFP can be constructed in a mathematical way, and is utilized to describe the design intent existed in designers’ brain systematically; SPM is realized by associating AFPs into part solid models; in this way, the design intent is stored in part solid models at part modeling stage, thus bridging the gaps between part modeling and assembly modeling at process level, and providing heuristics for assembly modeling automation. On this basis, the natural relationships between part modeling and assembly modeling at process level are revealed, paving the way to formalize part modeling and assembly modeling from the perspective of process in a unified framework. Finally, an implementation sample is demonstrated to validate the feasibility of the proposed approach. The proposed integration theoretical system at process level may provide the potential to facilitate the paradigm shift in product modeling to make it simpler and integrate more downstream applications.

Keywords

Part modeling Assembly modeling Integration of process Design intent description Structure pre-mapping Assembly feature pair 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is financially supported by Nature Science Foundation of China (51505152, 51275177), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2016T90780), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2015NM027), the Open Foundation of the State Key Laboratory of CAD&CG of Zhejiang University (A1508), and the Science & Technology Research Program of Guangdong (2016A030310409). Great thanks are also given to the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions, which helped us to improve the manuscript.

References

  1. Abdul-Ghafour, S., Ghodous, P., Shariat, B., & Perna, E. (2008). Towards an intelligent CAD models sharing based on semantic web technologies. In R. Curran, S. Y. Chou, A. Trappey (Eds.), Collaborative product and service life cycle management for a sustainable world (pp. 195–203). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Albers, A., Ohmer, M., & Eckert, C. (2003). Engineering design in a different way: Cognitive perspective on the contact and channel model approach. In Proceedings of the visual and spatial reasoning in design (pp. 1–21). University of Sydney, Cambridge, MA, USA, 22–23 July 2003.Google Scholar
  3. Alemanni, M., Destefanis, F., & Vezzetti, E. (2011). Model-based definition design in the product lifecycle management scenario. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 1–4, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borkar, B. R., & Puri, Y. M. (2015). Automatic extraction of machining features from prismatic parts using STEP for downstream applications. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, 96(3), 231–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Camba, J., Contero, M., Johnson, M., et al. (2014). Extended 3D annotations as a new mechanism to explicitly communicate geometric design intent and increase CAD model reusability. Computer-Aided Design, 57, 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Camba, J. D., & Contero, M. (2015). Assessing the impact of geometric design intent annotations on parametric model alteration activities. Computers in Industry, 71, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chan, C. K., & Tan, S. T. (2003). Generating assembly features onto split solid models. Computer-Aided Design, 35, 1315–1336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, X., Gao, S., Yang, Y., et al. (2012). Multi-level assembly model for top-down design of mechanical products. Computer-Aided Design, 44(10), 1033–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chin, K. S., Zhao, Y., & Mok, C. K. (2002). STEP-based multiview integrated product modelling for concurrent engineering. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 20, 896–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Fazio, T. L. (1990). A prototype of feature-based design for assembly. In Proceedings of the ASME advances in design automation, Chicago, IL, USA (pp. 9–16).Google Scholar
  11. Deneux, D. (1999). Introduction to assembly features: An illustrated synthesis methodology. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 10, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. He, B., Song, W., & Wang, Y. G. (2013). A feature-based approach towards an integrated product model in intelligent design. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 69, 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. He, B., Zhang, P. C., Zhu, N. F., et al. (2015). Skeleton model-based approach to integrated engineering design and analysis. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology,. doi: 10.1007/s00170-015-8047-5.Google Scholar
  14. He, K. J., Chen, Z. M., & Zhao, L. H. (2011). A new method for classification and parametric representation of freeform surface feature. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 57, 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henson, B. W., Baxter, J. E., & Juster, N. P. (1993). Assembly representation within a product data framework. ASME Advances in Design Automation, 65(1), 195–205.Google Scholar
  16. Hoffmann, P., Feng, S. C., Ameta, G., et al. (2007). Towards a multi-view semantic model for product feature description. Collaborative product and service life cycle management for a sustainable world. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  17. Horváth, L., & Rudas, I. (2004). Modeling and problem solving techniques for engineers. Cambridge, MA: Elsevier, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kallmann, M., & Thalmann, D. (2002). Modeling behaviors of interactive objects for real-time virtual environments. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 13(2), 177–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lam, T. K. (2001). A non-manifold feature-based approach for integrating mechanical conceptual design and assemblies. Thesis. Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hongkong, China.Google Scholar
  20. Lau, H. Y. K. (2003). A hidden Markov model-based assembly contact recognition system. Mechatronics, 13, 1001–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee, K., & Andrews, G. (1985). Inference of positions of components in an assembly: Part 2. Computer-Aided Design, 17(1), 20–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leu, M. C., Elmaraghy, H. A., Nee, A. Y. C., et al. (2013). CAD model based virtual assembly simulation, planning and training. CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology, 62(2), 799–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Li, G. D., Zhou, L. S., An, L. L., et al. (2009). A methodology for rapid assembly modeling of components with typical assembly feature. In Proceedings of 2009 international conference on measuring technology and mechatronics automation (Vol. 2, pp. 179–183). IEEE.Google Scholar
  24. Liu, J. H., & Sun, Z. Y. (2007). Representing design intents for design thinking process medelling. Global design to gain a competitive edge. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Liu, Z. Y., & Tan, J. R. (2007). Constrained behavior manipulation for interactive assembly in a virtual environment. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 32, 797–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mascle, C. (2002). Feature-based assembly model for integration in computer-aided assembly. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 18, 373–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma, Y. S., Britton, G. A., Tor, S. B., et al. (2007). Associative assembly design features: Concept implementation and application. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 32, 434–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ma, Y. S., Chen, G., & Thimm, G. (2008). Paradigm shift: Unified and associative feature-based concurrent and collaborative engineering. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 19, 625–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Plumed, R., Varley, P., & Company, P. (2012). Features and design intent in engineering sketches. Intelligent Computer Graphics, SCI, 441, 77–106.Google Scholar
  30. Qian, L., & Gero, J. S. (1996). Function–behavior–structure paths and their role in analogy-based design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 10(4), 289–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Quintana, V., Rivest, L., & Pellerin, R. (2010). Will model-based definition replace engineering drawings throughout the product lifecycle? A global perspective from aerospace industry. Computers in Industry, 61, 497–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roy, U., & Bharadwaj, B. (2002). Design with part behaviors: Behavior model, representation and applications. Computer-Aided Design, 34, 613–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shah, J. J., & Rogers, M. T. (1993). Assembly modeling as an extension of feature-based design. Research in Engineering Design, 5, 212–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shang, Y., Huang, K. Z., & Zhang, Q. P. (2009). Genetic model for conceptual design of mechanical products based on functional surface. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 42(3–4):211–221.Google Scholar
  35. Singh, P., & Bettig, B. (2004). Port-compatibility and connectability based assembly design. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 4, 197–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sodhi, R., & Turner, J. U. (1991). Representing tolerance and assembly information in a feature-based design environment. In Proceedings of the 1991 ASME design automation conference, Miami, Florida, USA (vol. DE-vol. 32-1, pp. 101–108).Google Scholar
  37. Sosa, R., Lee, J. B., Albarran, D., et al. (2015). From concept to specification maintaining early design intent. In ICoRD’15—Research into design across boundaries (Vol. 2, pp. 445–457). Springer, India.Google Scholar
  38. van Holland, W., & Bronsvoort, W. F. (2000). Assembly features in modeling and planning. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 16, 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang, H., Xiang, D., Duan, G., et al. (2007). Assembly planning based on semantic modeling approach. Computers In Industry, 58, 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Welch, R. V., & Dixon, J. R. (1992). Representing function, behavior and structure during conceptual design. In Proceedings of the ASME design theory and methodology conference (pp. 11–18).Google Scholar
  41. Xu, Z., Li, Y., Zhang, J., et al. (2013). Product modeling framework based on interaction feature pair. Computer-Aided Design, 45(12), 1591–1603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xu, Z., Wang, Q., & Li, J. (2016). Product modeling based on structure pre-mapping. Journal of Mechanical Engineering. http://www.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.2187.TH.20160830.0900.048.html. Accessed 30 Aug 2016. (in Chinese with English Abstract).
  43. Yoo, M. J., Um, J. Y., Stroud, I., et al. (2014). Integration of design intent during the product lifecycle management. Product lifecycle management for a global market. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Zhang, J., Wang, P., Zuo, M., et al. (2015). Automatic assembly simulation of product in virtual environment based on interaction feature pair. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi: 10.1007/s10845-015-1173-y.
  45. Zhang, J., Xu, Z., Li, Y., et al. (2015). Framework for the integration of assembly modeling and simulation based on assembly feature pair. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015(78), 765–780.Google Scholar
  46. Zhu, H., Wu, D., & Fan, X. (2010). Interactive assembly tool planning based on assembly semantics in virtual environment. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 51, 739–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhi-Jia Xu
    • 1
  • Pan Wang
    • 2
  • Qing-Hui Wang
    • 1
  • Jing-Rong Li
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Automotive EngineeringSouth China University of TechnologyGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.The Ministry of Education Key Lab of Contemporary Design and Integrated Manufacturing TechnologyNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations