Empowering CAPP Systems with Human-Computer Interaction Study

Abstract

Initially designed to fill the gap between CAD and CAM systems, computer aided process planning(CAPP) systems have reached very limited success and acceptance in industry. To explain this assessment, some researchers point out the fact that most existing approaches aim at complete automation, and suggest that CAPP systems should integrate the human planner into the decision-loop to improve its flexibility and efficiency. For instance, such systems should provide some relevant information about alternative plans rather than automatically computing one unique plan.

The objective of the present paper is to provide some results about the efficiency of such alternative proposal from a human-computer interaction point of view. Our work is based on an existing set-up planning method. Human decision-making is necessary because no accurate optimality metric has emerged to automatically select the set-up positions among the computed alternatives. This paper deals with the design and early evaluation of the future user-interface of a set-up planning module. A mock-up of the human-computer interface has been designed to drive the evaluation. This evaluation points out that the number of alternatives solutions should be limited.

Keywords

human-computer interaction(HCI) user-interface CAPP 5-axis NC machining set-up planning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    T.C. Chang. Expert Process Planning for Manufacturing, Addison-Wesley Publication, Massachusetts, USA, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F.J.A.M. van Houten. PART—A Computer Aided Process Planning System, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands, 1991.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. van Zeir, J.-P. Kruth, J. Detand. A conceptual framework for interactive and blackboard based CAPP, Int. J. Production Research 36(6), 1998, 1453–1473.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    X. Li, S. Kambhampati. Process planner’s assistant: An interactive and iterative approach to automating process planning, in Proceedings of DETC’97 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Sacramento, USA, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Amara, P. Dépincé, J-Y. Hascoët. A human-centered architecture for process planning, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Systems 33(4), 2004, 363–372.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. Shen, D.H. Norrie. Agent based systems for intelligent manufacturing: A state of the art survey, Knowledge and Information Systems 1(2), 1999, 129–156.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    V. Capponi, O. Zirmi, D. Brissaud, F. Villeneuve. Computer Aided Process Planning, strategy and models in aircraft industry, Journal of Engineering Manufacture(Special Issue of the Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B), 220(4), 2006, 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    V. Capponi, F. Villeneuve, H. Paris. Handling of alternative processes for machining of aeronautical parts in a CAPP system, in Proceedings of the IFAC Conference on Manufacturing, Modelling, Management and Control(IFAC-MiM’04), Athens, 21–22 October 2004.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Nielsen, R. Molich. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces, in Proceedings of CHI’90 Conference, Seattle, ACM New York, 1990, pp. 349–356.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. Bastien, D.L. Scapin. Evaluating a user interface with ergonomic criteria, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 7(2), 1995, 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Rasmussen. The Human as a system component, in Human Interactions with Computers Smith and Green(Eds.), London Academic Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Kolski. Interfaces homme-machine, Editions Hermès, Paris, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Nigay. Conception assistée par ordinateur: Aménagement d’une cuisine, in Actes de la Conférence IHM’96, Cépaduès-Editions, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.-G. Miller. The magic number Seven plus or minus two: Some limits in our capacity for processing information, Psychological Review 63, 1965, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J-M. Hoc. Conditions et enjeux de la coopération homme-machine dans le cadre de la fiabilité des systèmes, in Sécurité et Cognition, J.G. Ganascia(Ed.), Edition Hermès, Paris, 1999, pp. 147–164.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire Sols Solides Structures, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Hydraulique et de Mécanique de GrenobleSt Martin d’Hères CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations