Auto-recognition and part model complexity quantification of regular-freeform revolved surfaces through delta volume generations

  • Ahmad Faiz Zubair
  • Mohd Salman Abu MansorEmail author
Original Article


Vast research works implementing feature-based technology have successfully been devoted. However, work on recognition of revolved regular-freeform surfaces is still inadequate due to its complex geometrical properties and topologies resulting lack of its physical significance. This paper presents a new method for recognising both regular and freeform revolved surfaces part model and generates its sub-delta volume using the volume decomposition method. To map the recognised sub-delta volume and respective machining process, part model complexity (PMC) is introduced. Generated sub-delta volumes are classified into three types of revolved surfaces excluding internal features. Sub-delta volumes are generated based on the machining process of roughing and finishing by offsetting the recognised faces. Internal features are de-featured by revolving respective sectioned faces. Differences of the overall delta volume (\(\Delta {\text{ODV}}\)) were calculated and verifications of the proposed PMC were done and presented.


Automatic feature recognition Volume decomposition Regular-freeform revolved surfaces Part model complexity Computer-aided process planning (CAPP) 



This research is supported by the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and Universiti Sains Malaysia under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) (Reference No. 6071227), Exploratory Research Grant Scheme (ERGS) (Reference No. 6730015), and Research University Grants (Reference Nos. 811186 and 814247). The first author also would like to thank the support of the Universiti Teknologi MARA for the staff’s study sponsorship.


  1. 1.
    Middlemiss RR, John LM, James RS (1968) 15-4. Surfaces of revolution. In: Analytic geometry. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 378Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shiqiao L, Shah JJ (2007) Recognition of user-defined turning features for mill/turn. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 7:225–235. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tseng Y-J, Joshi SB (1998) Recognition of interacting rotational and prismatic machining features from 3-D mill-turn parts. Int J Prod Res 36:3147–3165. CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Waiyagan K, Bohez ELJ (2008) Intelligent feature based process planning for five-axis mill-turn parts. Comput Ind 60:296–316. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu L, Huang Z, Liu W, Wu W (2017) Extracting the turning volume and features for a mill / turn part with multiple extreme faces. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yip-Hoi D, Dutta D, Huang Z (2003) A customizable machining feature extraction methodology for turned components. J Manuf Syst 22:82–98. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Campbell MI (2014) Automatic reasoning for defining lathe operations for mill-turn parts: a tolerance based approach. J Mech Des 136:1–10. Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Long H, Mynors DJ, Holland P, Standring P (2004) Knowledge-based process selection for rotationally symmetric and rotationally non-symmetric components in cold forming. J Mater Process Technol 153–154:338–345. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ismail N, Abu Bakar N, Juri AH (2002) Feature recognition patterns for form features using boundary representation models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 20:553–556. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ismail N, Abu Bakar N, Juri AH (2004) Recognition of cylindrical-based features using edge boundary technique for integrated manufacturing. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 20:417–422. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ismail N, Abu Bakar N, Juri AH (2005) Recognition of cylindrical and conical features using edge boundary classification. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45:649–655. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deja M, Siemiatkowski MS (2013) Feature-based generation of machining process plans for optimised parts manufacture. J Intell Manuf 24:831–846. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yih J, Ming L, Wang H et al (2016) Recognition of virtual loops on 3D CAD models based on the B-rep model. Eng Comput 32:593–606. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Balic J, Kovacic M, Vaupotic B (2006) Intelligent programming of CNC turning operations using genetic algorithm. J Intell Manuf 17:331–340. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dwijayanti K, Aoyama H (2014) Basic study on process planning for turning-milling center based on machining feature recognition. J Adv Mech Des Syst Manuf 8:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Deb S, Parra-castillo JR (2011) An integrated and intelligent computer-aided process planning methodology for machined rotationally symmetrical parts. Int J Adv Manuf Syst 13:1–26Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sivakumar S, Dhanalakshmi V (2013) An approach towards the integration of CAD/CAM/CAI through STEP file using feature extraction for cylindrical parts. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 26:561–570. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sakurai H, Chin C-W (1994) Definition and recognition of volume features for process planning. Adv Featur Based Manuf 20:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bok AY, Abu Mansor MS (2012) Generative regular-freeform surface recognition for generating material removal volume from stock model. Comput Ind Eng 64:162–178. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kataraki PS, Abu Mansor MS (2016) Auto-recognition and generation of material removal volume for regular form surface and its volumetric features using volume decomposition method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sundarajan V, Wright PK (2000) Identification of multiple feature representations by volume 2. 5-Dimensional components. J Manuf Sci Eng 122:280–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Geng W, Chen Z, He K, Wu Y (2016) Feature recognition and volume generation of uncut regions for electrical discharge machining. Adv Eng Softw 91:51–62. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zubair AF, Abu Mansor MS (2018) Automatic feature recognition of regular features for symmetrical and non-symmetrical cylinder part using volume decomposition method. Eng Comput 34:843–863. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chase S, Murty P (2000) Evaluating the complexity of CAD models as a measure for student assessment. Eternity, infinity and virtuality in architecture: Proceedings of ACADIA 2000, vol 1, pp 173–182Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang X, Thomson V (2018) A knowledge-based measure of product complexity. Comput Ind Eng 115:80–87. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kwon S, Mun D, Kim BC, Han S (2016) Feature shape complexity: a new criterion for the simplification of feature-based 3D CAD models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 1831–1843.
  27. 27.
    Dimas E, Briassoulis D (1999) 3D geometric modelling based on NURBS: a review. Adv Eng Softw 30:741–751. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van den Berg E, Bronsvoort W, Vergeest J (2002) Freeform feature modeling: concepts and prospects. Comput Ind 49:217–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Leslie P, Wayne T (1987) Curve and surface constructions using rational B-splines. Comput Des 19:485–498zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kataraki PS, Abu Mansor MS (2018) A novel classification of freeform volumetric features and generative CAPP approach for milling machine selection. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim BC, Mun D (2015) Enhanced volume decomposition minimizing overlapping volumes for the recognition of design features. J Mech Sci Technol 29:5289–5298. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringUniversiti Sains MalaysiaNibong TebalMalaysia

Personalised recommendations