Advertisement

Automating the Conceptual Design Process: From Black-box to Component Selection

  • Tolga Kurtoglu
  • Albert Swantner
  • Matthew I. Campbell

Conceptual design is a vital part of the design process during which designers first envision new ideas and then synthesize them into physical configurations that meet certain design specifications. In this research, a suite of computational tools is developed that assists the designers perform this non-trivial task of navigating the design space for creating conceptual design solutions. The methodology is based on automating the function-based synthesis paradigm by combining various computational methods. Accordingly, three nested search algorithms are developed and integrated that mimic a designer's decision-making at various stages of conceptual design. The implemented system provides a method for automatically generating novel alternative solutions to real design problems. The application of the approach to the design of an electromechanical device shows the method's range of capabilities, and how it serves as a comparison to human conceptual design generation and as a tool suite to complement the skills of a designer.

Keywords

Function Structure Mechanical Energy Search Tree Design Configuration Component Selection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Pahl G, W Beitz (1996) “Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach,” Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mittal S, Dym C, Morjara M (1985) “PRIDE: An Expert System for the Design of Paper Handling Systems”, IEEE Computer, Vol.19:7, pp. 102–114. 22.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qian L., Gero JS, (1996) “Function-behavior-structure paths and their role in analogy-based design”, AIEDAM Vol. 10, pp. 289–312.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhatta S, Goel A, Prabhakar S (1994) “Innovation in Analogical Design: A Model-Based Approach,” Proceedings of the AI in Design, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 57–74.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hundal M (1990) “A Systematic Method for Developing Function Structures, Solutions and Concept Variants,” Mechanism and Machine Theory, 25:3, pp.243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ward AC, WP Seering, (1989) “The performance of a mechanical design compiler”, ASME, Design Engineering Vol 17, pp. 89–97.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bracewell RH, Sharpe JEE (1996) “Functional Description Used in Computer Support for Qualitative Scheme Generation- “Schemebuilder ”, Artificial I n-telligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 10:4, pp. 333–345.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chakrabarti A, Bligh T (1996) “An Approach to Functional Synthesis of Mechanical Design Concepts: Theory, Applications and Emerging Research Issues,” AIEDAM, 10, pp.313–331.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Campbell M, Cagan J, Kotovsky K (2000) “Agent-based Synthesis of ElectroMechanical Design Configurations”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 122:1, pp. 61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang K, Yan J, (2002) “An Analytical Approach to Functional Design,” Proceedings of ASME 2002 DETC, Montreal, CA.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sridharan P, MI Campbell (2005)A Study on the Grammatical Construction of Function Structures. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing,. 19(3): p. 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Agarwal M, J Cagan (1998) “A Blend of Different Tastes: The Language of Coffee Makers”, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 205–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shea, K., J. Cagan, and S.J. Fenves, 1997, “A Shape Annealing Approach to Optimal Truss Design with Dynamic Grouping of Members”, ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol 119, No. 3, pp. 388–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brown, K.N., and J. Cagan, 1997, “Optimized Process Planning by Generative Simulated Annealing”, Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, Vol. 11, pp.219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schmidt L, Cagan J (1995) “Recursive Annealing: A Computational Model for Machine Design”, Research in Engineering Design, 7:2, pp. 102–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Starling AC, K Shea (2003) “A Grammatical Approach to Computational Generation of Mechanical Clock Designs”, Proceedings of ICED 03 International Conference on Engineering Design. Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Starling AC, K. Shea (2005) “Virtual Synthesizers for Mechanical Gear Systems,” Proceedings of ICED 05 International Conference on Engineering Design, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wielinga BJ, Schreiber AT (1997) “Configuration Design Problem Solving” Technical Report University of Amsterdam, Department of Social Science Informatics.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carlson-Skalak S, White MD, Teng Y (1998) “Using an Evolutionary Algorithm for Catalog Design”, Research in Engineering DesignGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Campbell MI, (2007) The official GraphSynth Site,http://www.graphsynth. com,University of Texas at Austin
  21. 21.
    Carlson SE (1996) “Genetic Algorithm Attributes for Component Selection”, Research in Engineering DesignGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kurtoglu T, MI Campbell (2008) “Automated Synthesis of Electromechancial Design Configurations from Empirical Analysis of Function to Form Mapping,” Journal of Engineering Design, vol. 19, available online.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tamhankar MS, MI Campbell (2007) “An Intelligent and Efficient Tree Search Algorithm for Computer-Aided Component Selection”. ASME DETC07/DAC-34587, Las Vegas.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Design Repository, Design Engineering Lab, University of Missouri RollaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McMaster-Carr®, McMaster-Carr Supply Company,www.mcmaster.com

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tolga Kurtoglu
    • 1
  • Albert Swantner
    • 2
  • Matthew I. Campbell
    • 2
  1. 1.NASA Ames Research CenterUSA
  2. 2.University of Texas at AustinUSA

Personalised recommendations