Dealing with feature interactions for prismatic parts in STEP-NC

Article

Abstract

Determining the precedence of machining features is a critical issue in feature-based process planning. It becomes more complex when geometric interaction occurs between machining features. STEP-NC, the extension of STEP (ISO 10303) standard developed for CNC controllers, is a feature-based data model. It represents all the geometric and topological product data minus feature interactions. In this paper, machining precedence of interactive and non-interactive STEP-NC features is discussed. Local and global precedence of machining features are defined on the basis of geometric constraints, such as geometric interaction of features and feature approach face and technological constraint such as access direction of the cutting tool. A software tool has been developed to visualize the STEP-NC part model and to generate the graphs of feature interaction and feature precedence. The output can be then used to augment the STEP-NC data in order to generate the optimal sequence of operations.

Keywords

Feature interaction Feature precedence Process planning STEP-NC 

Nomenclature

P

The final part

B

The starting workpiece, blank

Fi

Feature i

Interaction between two features

\({f_{F^{i},F^{j}}}\)

Common face of feature i, j

\({F^{i}_{TAF}}\)

Top approach face for feature i

\({\vec{F}^{i}_{TAF}}\)

Normal vector for top approach face for feature i

\({\vec{T}_{AD}}\)

Normal vector for tool access direction

\({\phi}\)

Null set

ωi, j

The interacting entity of feature i, j

σP (Fi)

The common boundary of feature i and the final part

References

  1. Amaitik S.M. and Kilic S.E. (2007). An intelligent process planning system for prismatic parts using STEP features. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 31(9–10): 978–993 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chu C.C.P. and Gadh R. (1996). Feature-based approach for set-up minimization of process design from product design. Computer Aided Design 28(5): 321–332 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gadh R. and Prinz F.B. (1995). Automatic determination of feature interaction in design for manufacturing analysis. Transaction of the ASME, Journal of mechanical design 117(1): 2–9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gao S. and Shah J.J. (1998). Automatic recognition of interacting machining features based on minimal condition subgraph. Computer Aided Design 30(9): 727–739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gao, J. X., & Sharma, R. (2002). A STEP enabled and PDM-based manufacturing planning system. The Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Frontiers of Design and Manufacturing (ICFDM’2002), pp. 65–69.Google Scholar
  6. Gao J., Zheng D.T. and Gindy N. (2004). Mathematical representation of feature conversion for CAD/CAM system integration. Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing 20(5): 457–467 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gao J., Zheng D.T., Gindy N. and Clark D. (2005). Extraction/conversion of geometric dimensions and tolerances for machining features. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 26(4): 405–414 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hayes, C. (1990). Machining planning: A model of an expert level planning, process. Ph.D. Dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Hou M. and Faddis T. (2006). Automatic tool path generation of a feature-based CAD/CAPP/CAM integrated system. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 19(4): 350–358 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ibrahim R.N. and McCormack A.D. (2005). Robustness and generality issues of feature recognition for CNC machining. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing technology 25(7–8): 705–713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Irani S.A., Koo H.Y. and Raman S. (1995). Feature-based operation sequence generation in CAPP. International Journal of Production Research 33(1): 17–39 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ISO 13030-224. (2001). Industrial automation systems and integration; product data representation and exchange, Part 224. Application protocol: Mechanical product definition for process plans using machining features.Google Scholar
  13. ISO 14649-1. (2003a). Data model for computerized numerical controllers, Part 1: Overview and fundamental principles.Google Scholar
  14. ISO 14649-10. (2003b). Data model for computerized numerical controllers: Part 10: General process data.Google Scholar
  15. ISO 14649-11. (2003c). Data model for computerized numerical controllers, Part 11: Process data for milling.Google Scholar
  16. ISO 14649-111. (2004). Data model for computerized numerical controllers, Part 111: Tools for milling machines.Google Scholar
  17. ISO 13030-240. (2005). Industrial automation systems and integration; product data representation and exchange, Part 240: Application protocol: Process plans for machined products.Google Scholar
  18. Joshi S. and Chang T.C. (1988). Graph-based heuristics for recognition of machined features from a 3D solid model. Computer-Aided Design 20(2): 58–66 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kannan B. and Wright P.K. (2004). Efficient algorithms for automated process planning of 2.5D machined parts considering fixturing constraints. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 17(1): 16–28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim Y.S., Wang E. and Rho H.M. (2001). Geometry based machining precedence reasoning for feature based process planning. International Journal of Production Research 39(10): 2077–2103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lau H.C.W., Lee C.K.M., Jiang B., Hui I.K. and Pun K.F. (2005). Development of a computer-integrated system to support CAD to CAPP. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 26(9–10): 1032–1042 Google Scholar
  22. Li W.D., Ong S.K. and Nee A.Y.C. (2002). Recognizing manufacturing features from a design by feature model. Computer Aided Design 34(11): 849–868 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu X. (2000). CFACA: Component framework for feature-based design and process planning. Computer Aided Design 32(7): 397–408 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu Z. and Wang L. (2007). Sequencing of interacting prismatic machining features for process planning. Computers in Industry 58(4): 295–303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marefat M. and Kashyap R.L. (1990). Geometric reasoning for recognition of three-dimensional object features. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 12(10): 949–965 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Medani O. and Ratchev S.M. (2006). A STEP AP224 agent-based early manufacturability assessment environment using XML. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 27(9–10): 854–864 Google Scholar
  27. Nasr E.A. and Kamrani A. (2007). Computer-based design and manufacturing: An information-based approach. Springer, USA, 181–201 Google Scholar
  28. Nassehi A., Liu R. and Newman S.T. (2007). A new software platform to support feature-based process planning for interoperable STEP-NC. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 20(7): 669–683 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Open Cascade Technology. (2000). The applications of open cascade in CAD/CAM/CAE, http://www.opencascade.org/occ/areas/cadcamproducts/. Accessed 13 May 2008.
  30. Sormaz D.N. and Khoshnevis B. (2000). Modeling of manufacturing feature interactions for automated process planning. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 19(1): 28–45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sormaz D.N., Arumugam J. and Rajaraman S. (2004). Iintegrative process plan model and representation for intelligent distributed manufacturing planning. International Journal of Production Research 42(17): 3397–3417 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. STEP Tools Incorporation. (2008). http://www.steptools.com/. Accessed 13 May 2008.
  33. Suh S.H. and Cheon S.U. (2002). A framework for an intelligent CNC and data model. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 19(10): 727–735 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Suh, H., Ahluwalia, R. S., & Miller, J. E. (1991). Feature generation in concurrent engineering environment. In The Proceedings of the First ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling.Google Scholar
  35. Suh S.H., Lee B.E., Chung D.H. and Cheon S.U. (2003). Architecture and implementation of a shop-floor programming system for STEP-compliant CNC. Computer Aided Design 35(12): 1069–1083 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trika S.N. and Kashyap R.L. (1993). Geometric reasoning for extraction of manufacturing features in iso-oriented polyhedrons. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 16(11): 1087–1100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tsing Y.J. and Joshi S.B. (1994). Recognizing multiple interpretations of interacting machining features. Computer Aided Design 26(9): 667–88 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vandenbrande, J. H. (1990). Automatic recognition of machinable features in solid models. Ph.D. thesis, University of Rochester, USA.Google Scholar
  39. Wang L. and Shen W. (2003). DPP: An agent-based approach for distributed process planning. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 14(5): 429–439 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang L., Cai N., Feng H.Y. and Liu Z. (2006). Enriched machining feature-based reasoning for generic machining process sequencing. International Journal of Production Research 44(8): 1479–1501 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wong K.W., Lam K.M. and Siu W.C. (2001). An efficient algorithm for human face detection and facial feature extraction under different. Pattern Recognition 34(10): 1993–2004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Woo Y., Wang E., Kim Y.S. and Rho H.M. (2005). A Hybrid feature recognizer for machining process planning systems. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 54(1): 397–400 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xu, X. W. (2001). Feature recognition methodologies and beyond, Mechanical engineering transactions. ME25 No. 1.Google Scholar
  44. Xu X.W. (2005). Novel surface and volumetric feature interactions for process planning. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology 24(4): 185–194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Xu X.W. (2006). Realization of STEP-NC enabled machining. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22: 144–153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Xu X.W. and Hinduja S. (1997). Determination of finishing features in 2 1/2D components. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 211(2): 125–142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xu X.W. and Hinduja S. (1998). Recognition of rough machining features in 2.5D components. Computer Aided Design 30(7): 503–516 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xu X.W. and Newman S.T. (2006). Making CNC machine tools more open, interoperable and intelligent; a review of the technologies. Computers in Industry 57(2): 141–152 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sharif University of TechnologyTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of EngineeringThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  3. 3.RWTHAachen UniversityAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations