Advertisement

Constraints

, Volume 3, Issue 2–3, pp 227–237 | Cite as

Kinematic Reasoning with Spatial Decompositions

  • Patrick Olivier
Article
  • 31 Downloads

Abstract

This paper examines the application of hierarchical discrete spatial representations to the kinematic analysis and synthesis of the higher pairs. Two instances of hierarchical representation are investigated, a global decomposition in the form of quadtrees, and an object-centered, multi-level molecular decomposition. Kinematic reasoning with both representations relies upon the rapid evaluation of the single occupancy constraint. For both representations we present algorithms that allow the rapid detection of intersection between two objects, the analysis of higher pair mechanisms, and a restricted class of kinematic synthesis.

kinematic reasoning spatial representation spatial decomposition quadtrees 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Chakrabarti & T. Bligh. (1994). An approach to functional synthesis of solution in mechanical conceptual design: part I: introduction and knowledge representation,” Research in Engineering Design 6: 127–141.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Faltings. (1992). A symbolic approach to qualitative kinematics. Artificial Intelligence 56: 139–170.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    B.V. Funt. (1980). Problem-solving with diagrammatic representations. Artificial Intelligence 13: 201–230.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. Gardin & B. Meltzer. (1989). Analogical representations of naive physics. Artificial Intelligence 38: 139–159.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Gupta & M. Jakiela. (1994). Simulation and shape synthesis of kinematic pairs via small-scale interference detection. Research in Engineering Design 6: 103–123.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Hahn. (1988). Realistic animation of rigid bodies. (1988). Computer Graphics 22: 299–308.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    L. Joskowicz & E. Sacks. (1991). Computational kinematics. Artificial Intelligence 51: 381–416.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    L. Joskowicz & E. Sacks. (1994). Configuration space computation for mechanism design. In Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Lozano-Perez. (1983). Spatial planning: a configuration space approach. IEEE Transactions on Computers C-32: 89–120.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. Hari Narayanan. (1992). Imagery, diagrams and reasoning. Ph.D. thesis, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Olivier, A. Ormsby & K. Nakata. (1995). Occupancy array-based kinematic reasoning. Ninth International Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, pages 148–155.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Reuleaux. (1876). The Kinematics of Machinery. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Samet. (1990). The Design and Analysis of Spatial Data Structures. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. Schwartz & M. Hegarty. (1996). Coordinating multiple mental representations for reasoning about mechanical devices. AAAI Spring Symposium on Cognitive and Computational Models of Spatial Representation, pages 101–109.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Tessler, Y. Iwasaki & K. Law. (1995). Qualitative structural analysis using diagrammatic reasoning. In J. Glasgow, B. Chandresekaran & N. H. Narayanan, eds., Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, pages 711–730, AAAI Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Olivier
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer ScienceUniversity of WalesAberystwythU.K.

Personalised recommendations