Strategic Conceptual Design in Mechanism Synthesis

  • Kevin Otto
  • Donald R. Riley
  • Arthur G. Erdman
  • Albert Esterline
Conference paper

Abstract

Research into the conceptual stage of design was motivated by the difficulties users experience with theoretically based CAD tools. Based on studies of protocols of mechanical design experts, we have developed a control strategy to aid problem formulation. This representation can accommodate the methods and operators needed for original mechanism design. We are now formulating these methods and operators and are developing techniques to implement them.

Keywords

Rosen Maki Paradis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Johnson P., Zualkernan I., and Garber S., “Specification of Expertise”, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 26, 1987, pp. 161–181.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Esterline A., Rosen D., Otto K., Nelson L., Hessburg T., Riley D., and Erdman A., “A Methodology for Capturing Mechanical Design Expertise”, Proceedings of the 1988 ASME Computers in Engineering Conference, Vol. 1, San Francisco, 1988, pp. 47–56.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chase T., Burmester Theory for Four Precision Positions: An Extended Discourse with Application to the Dimensional Synthesis of Arbitrary Planar Linkages, PhD Thesis, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freudenstein F., and Maki E., “The Creation of Mechanisms According to Kinematic Structure and Function”, General Motors Research Publications, GMR-3073, September 1979.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cayley, A. “On Three Bar Motion”, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Vol. 7, 1876, pp. 136–167.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kota S., Erdman A., Riley D., “MINN-Dwel — Computer Aided Design and Analysis of Linkage — Type Dwell Mechanisms”, Proceedings of the 1987 ASME Computers in Engineering Conference, Vol. 2, New York, 1987, pp. 351–358.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paradis M., Willmert K., “Optimal Mechanism Design Using the Gauss Constrained Method”, Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design, Vol 105, June 1983, pp 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kannapan S., and Marshek K., “Design Synthetic Reasoning: A Program for Research”, Mechanical Systems and Design Technical Report 202, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Kleer J., and Brown J., “A Qualitative Physics based on Confluences”, Qualitative Reasoning about Physical Systems, D. Bobrow ed., MIT Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hayes P., “The Second Naive Physics Manifesto”, Readings in Knowledge Representation, Brachman R., and Levesque H., ed., Morgan Kaufmann, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schank R., and Abelson R., Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding, Lawrence Erlbaum Publ., Hillsdale NJ, 1977.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kannapan S., and Marshek K., “Design Methodologies: A New Perspective on Approaches and Tasks”, Mechanical Design Technical Report 201, 1987.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ullman D., and Dietterich T., “Mechanical Design Methodology: Implications on Future Developments of Computer Aided Design and Knowledge-Based Systems”, ASME CIE, 1986, pp. 173–180.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flanagan J., “The Critical Incident Technique”, The Psychological Bulletin, July 1954, pp. 327–359.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ericsson K., and Simon H., Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, The MIT Press, Cambridge Mass., 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin Otto
    • 1
  • Donald R. Riley
    • 1
  • Arthur G. Erdman
    • 1
  • Albert Esterline
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringProductivity Center University of MinnesotaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceProductivity Center University of MinnesotaUSA

Personalised recommendations