Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Geometric abstractions to support disassembly analysis

  • Published:
IIE Transactions

Abstract

Determining whether an assembly can be constructed from its components at the design stage potentially reduces downstream assembly problems. This determination can be accomplished by performing a disassembly analysis of the assembly′s geometric model. This paper presents two abstractions derived from the assembly′s geometric model that can determine the validity of the assembly: (1) the Assembly Topology Graph (ATG); and (2) the set of boundary components. The first abstraction, the ATG, is a graph whose nodes represent the components in the assembly and whose edges represent a non-null intersection of the convex hulls of component pairs. The second abstraction, the set of boundary components, represents components that intersect the boundary (or convex hull) of the assembly. These boundary components are typically the ones most accessible with respect to disassembly. This paper also discusses an algorithm, which utilizes the ATG to determine pair-wise interlocking components. If such component pairs are absent, then the disassembly sequence for the removal of components in the assembly is determined by analyzing the set of boundary components for disassembly. This procedure is repeated until all the components in the assembly are disassembled (for a valid assembly).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Homem DeMello, L.S. and Sanderson, A.C. (1991) Representations of mechanical assembly sequences. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 7, 211–277.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wilson, R.H. and Latombe, J.C. (1994) Geometric reasoning about mechanical assembly. Artificial Intelligence, 71(2), 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mattikalli, R.S., Khosla, P.K. and Xu, Y. (1990) Subassembly identification and motion generation for assembly: a geometric approach. Proceedings of the 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems Engineering, Pittsburgh, PA, IEEE, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, 399–403.

  4. Agarwal, P.K., Berg, M.D., Halperin, D. and Sharir, M. (1996) Efficient generation of k-directional assembly sequences, in Proceedings of the 7th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, Atlanta, USA, 122–131.

  5. Liu, Y. and Popplestone, R.J. (1989) Planning for assembly from solid models, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Scottsdale, AZ, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, Vol 1, pp. 222–227.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Goldwasser, M., Latombe, J.C. and Motwani, R. (1996) Complexity measures for assembly sequences, in Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Part 2, Minneapolis, MN, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 1581–1587.

  7. Mattikalli, R.S. and Khosla, P.K. (1992) Motion constraints from contact geometry: representation and analysis, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Nice, France, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 2178–2185.

  8. Halperin, D. (1994) Assembly partitioning with a constant number of translations. Technical Report Sandia National Labs, SAND94–1819, 1–17.

  9. [9] Chakrabarty, S. and Wolter, J. (1994) A hierarchical approach to assembly planning, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Diego, CA, IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 258–263.

  10. Woo, T.C. and Dutta, D. (1991) Automatic disassembly and total ordering in three dimensions. ASME Transactions Journal of Engineering for Industry, 13(2), May, 207–213.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dutta, D. and Woo, A.C. (1992) Algorithms for multiple disassembly and parallel assemblies. Concurrent Engineering, 59, 257–266.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Beasley, D. and Martin, R.R. (1993) Disassembly sequences for objects built from unit cubes. CAD, 25, 751–761.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shin, K. and Cho, H.S. (1994) On the generation of robotic assembly sequences based on separability and assembly motion stability. Robotica, 12, 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Xu, Y., Mattikalli, R. and Khosla, P. (1995) Generation of partial medial axis for disassembly motion planning. Journal of Design and Manufacturing, 5, 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kroll, E., Beasley, B., Parulin, A. and Berners, D. (1994) Evaluating ease-of-disassembly for product recycling. ASME Materials and Design Technology, 62, 165–172.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lowe, A.S. and Niku, S.B. (1995) A methodology for design for disassembly. ASME Design for Manufacturability, 81, 47–53.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lee, K. and Gadh, R. (1996) Destructive disassembly to support virtual prototyping, IIE Transactions, 30(10), 959–972.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Requicha, A.A.G. and Whalen, T.W. (1991) Representations for assemblies. Computer-Aided Mechanical Assembly Planning, (L.S. Homen de Mello, (ed)), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 15–39.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Turner, J.U. (1991) Relative positioning of parts in assemblies using mathematical programming. Computer Aided Mechanical Assembly Planning, (L.S. Homen de Mello, (ed)), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, 111–126.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Stoer, J. and Witzgall, C. (1970) Convexity and Optimization in Finite Dimensions I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Chazelle, B. (1993) An optimal convex hull algorithm in any fixed dimension. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 10, 377–409.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Latombe, J.C. (1991) Robot Motion Planning, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Preparata, F.P. and Shamos, M.I. (1985) Computational Geometry, Springer-Verlag, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kepler, A. (1987) Lower bound on the complexity of the convex hull problem for simple polyhedra. Information Processing Letters, 25, 159–161.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Muller, D.E. and Preparata, F.P. (1978) Finding the intersection of two convex polyhedra. SIAM Journal of Computing, 21, 671–696.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Stefan, H., Mantyala, M., Kurt, M. and Jurg, N. (1984) Space sweep solves intersection of convex polyhedra. Acta Informatica, 21, 501–519.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dobkin, D. and Kirkpatrick, D.G. (1985) A linear algorithm for determining the separation of convex polyhedra. Journal of Algorithms, 6, 381–392.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Chazelle, B. (1992) An optimal algorithm for intersecting threedimensional convex polyhedra. SIAM Journal of computing, 21, 671–696.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. N. Shyamsundar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rajit Gadh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shyamsundar, N., Gadh, R. Geometric abstractions to support disassembly analysis. IIE Transactions 31, 935–946 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007619330337

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007619330337

Keywords

Search

Navigation