Maintaining Consistency in the Design Process

  • Dan Braha
  • Oded Maimon
Part of the Applied Optimization book series (APOP, volume 17)


In Chapter 5, we investigated the notion of design consistency: small changes in specifications should lead to small changes in design. The mathematical concept that is used to investigate the principle of design consistency is that of continuos analysis and continuos synthesis. In this chapter, the concept of design consistency in the area of variational design is furthered formalized, and the COAST (COnsistency through Analysis of Solution Trajectories) methodology is implemented for maintaining design consistency in those design areas where similarity between designs can be calculated [21]. The formal description of an evolutionary design model as given in Chapter 6 is used to define the design paradigm used in COAST.


Variational Design Correct Solution Continuation Method Constraint Solver Consistent Solution 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agrawal, R., A Constraint Management Approach for Optimal Design of Mechanical Systems, Ph.D. Thesis, Ohio State University, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allgower and K. Georg, Numerical Continuation Methods: An Introduction,Springer-Verlag, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beaty, P, A. Fitzhom, and G. J. Herron, “Extensions in Variational Geometry that Generate and Modify Object Edges Composed of Rational Bezier Curves”, Computer-Aided Design, vol. 26, no. 2, February 1994, pp 98–108.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borning, B., Freeman-Benson, and M. Wilson, “Constraint Hierarchies”, Lisp and Symbolic Computation, 1992, pp 223–270.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buchanan, A., and A. de Pennington, “Constraint Definition System: A Computer Algebra Based Approach to Solving Geometric Problems”, Computer Aided Design, 1993, December, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 741–750.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gallaher, D. T., Variational Systems in Computer-Aided Design, M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1984.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thompson, D. W., On Growth and Form, University Press, Second Edition, 1952.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hammer, M. Hocks, U. Kulisch, and D. Ratz, Numerical Toolbox for Verified Computing /, Springer-Verlag, Germany, 1993.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kearfott, B. and Z. Xing, “An Interval Step Control for Continuation Methods”, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, June 1994, vol., 31, no. 3, pp. 892–914.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jablokow, J.J. Uicker Jr., and D.A. Turcic, “Topological and Geometric Consistency in Boundary Representations of Solid Models of Mechanical Components”, Journal of Mechanical Design, vol. 115, December 1993, pp 762–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krawczyk and A. Neumaier, “Interval Slopes for Rational Functions and Associated Centered Forms”, SIAM Journal of Numerical Analysis, June 1985, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 604–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Light, R. A., Symbolic Dimensioning in Computer-Aided Design, M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1980.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lin, V. C. Three-Dimensional Variational Geometry in Computer-Aided Design, M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1981.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mackrell, J., “Making Sense of a Revolution”, Computer Graphics World, November 1993, pp 2638.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neumaier, A., “Rigorous Sensitivity Analysis for Parameter-Dependent Systems of Equations”, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 144 (1989), pp 16–25.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neumaier, A., Interval Methods for Systems of Equations, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1990.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Serrano, D., MathPAK: An Interactive Preliminary Design Package, M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1984.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wampler, A. P. Morgan, and A. J. Sommese, “Numerical Continuation Methods for Solving Polynomial Systems Arising in Kinematics”, Journal of Mechanical Design, March 1990, vol. 112, pp. 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wilson, M. A. Hierarchical Constraint Logic Programming, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Washington, May 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Suzuki, H., H. Ando, and F. Kimura, “Geometric Constraints and Reasoning for Geometrical CAD Systems”, Computers and Graphics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp 211–224.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Huffaker, A. V. and O. Z. Maimon, “Maintaining a Consistent Configuration in a Constraint-Based Mechanical Design System,” ASME Annual Winter Meeting, RSAFP Symposium, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dan Braha
    • 1
  • Oded Maimon
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringBen Gurion UniversityBeer ShevaIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Industrial EngineeringTel-Aviv UniversityTel-AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations