Set Based Robust Design of Systems – Application to Flange Coupling

Conference paper

Abstract

A set-based approach to design of mechanical systems is presented in the following text. Set-based technique allows keeping multiple alternatives alive during the design process while narrowing through the possibilities towards the most optimal solution. Using the Quantifier notion from QCSP (Quantified Constraint Satisfaction Problem), a formal expression for the problem has been developed. An algorithm using QCSP transformation through interval analysis has also been developed. In order to demonstrate the approach, an example of design of rigid flange coupling with a variable number of bolts and a choice of bolts from ISO M standard has been resolved and demonstrated.

Keywords

Set based design Robust design QCSP Quantifiers Tolerance integration 

References

  1. 1.
    Sobek, D.K., Ward, A.C., Liker, J.K. (1999) Toyota’s principles of set-based concurrent engineering, 40(2):67–83.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beyer, H.G., Sendhoff, B. (2007) Robust optimization – A comprehensive survey. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 196:3190–3218.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taguchi, G. (1978) Off-line and on-line quality control systems. Proceedings of International Conference on Quality Control, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taguchi, G. (1987) In: Clausing, D. (Ed.) System of Experimental Design. American Supplier Institute, Dearborn, MI.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park, G.J., Lee, T.H., et al. (2006) Robust design: An overview. AIAA Journal, 44(1):181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Malak, Jr. R.J., Aughenbaugh, J.M., Paredis, C.J.J. (2009) Multi-attribute utility analysis in set-based conceptual design. Computer-Aided Design, 41:214–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anderl, R., Mendgen, R. (1995) Parametric design and its impact on solid modeling applications. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Solid Modeling and Applications, Salt Lake City, UT, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Verger, G., Christian, B. (2006) BlockSolve: A bottom-up approach for solving quantifier CSPs. Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming – CP, 978-3-540-46267-5.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bordeaux, L., Montfroy, E. (2002) Beyond NP: Arc-consistency for quantified constraints. Proceedings CP’02, Ithaca, NY, pp. 371–386.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mamoulis, N., Stergiou, K. (2004) Algorithms for quantified constraint satisfaction problems. Proceedings CP’04, Toronto, ON, Canada, pp. 752–756.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benhamou, F., Goulard, F., Granvilliers, L. (1999) Revising hull and box consistency. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Logic programming, The MIT press, Las Cruces, NM, pp. 230–244.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • A.J. Qureshi
    • 1
  • J.Y. Dantan
    • 1
  • J. Bruyere
    • 2
  • R. Bigot
    • 1
  1. 1.LCFCArts et Métiers ParisTech MetzMetz Cedex 3France
  2. 2.LaMCoS UMR5259, CNRSUniversité de Lyon, INSA-LyonVilleurbanneFrance

Personalised recommendations