0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Decomposition-Based Assembly Synthesis for Maximum Structural Strength and Modularity

[+] Author and Article Information
O. L. Cetin, K. Saitou

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109

J. Mech. Des 126(2), 244-253 (May 05, 2004) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1667890 History: Received July 01, 2001; Revised May 01, 2003; Online May 05, 2004
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Mantripragada,  R., and Whitney,  D. E., 1998, “The Datum Flow Chain: A Systematic Approach to Assembly Design and Modeling,” Res. Eng. Des., 10(3), pp. 150–165.
Saitou, K., and Yetis, A., 2000, “Decomposition-Based Assembly Synthesis of Structural Products: Preliminary Results,” Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Tools and Methods of Competitive Engineering, Delft, The Netherlands, April 18–21.
Smith,  R. P., 1998, “Teaching Design for Assembly Using Product Disassembly,” IEEE Trans. Educ., 41(1), pp. 50–53.
Yetis, A., 2000, “Decomposition-based Assembly Synthesis of Structural Products,” Master’s thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor.
Yetis,  A., and Saitou,  K., 2002, “Decomposition-Based Assembly Synthesis Based on Structural Considerations,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 124, pp. 593–601.
Chirehdast,  M., Gea,  H.-C., Kikuchi,  N., and Papalambros,  P. Y., 1994, “Structural Configuration Examples of an Integrated Optimal Design Process,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 116(4), pp. 997–1004.
Chirehdast, M., 1992, “An Integrated Optimization Environment for Structural Configuration Design,” PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.
Bendsoe,  M., and Kikuchi,  N., 1988, “Generating Optimal Topologies in Structural Design using a Homegenization Method,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 71, pp. 197–224.
Chapman,  C. D., Saitou,  K., and Jakiela,  M. J., 1994, “Genetic Algorithms as an Approach to Configuration and Topology Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 116, pp. 1005–1012.
Shea,  K., and Cagan,  J., 1999, “Languages and Semantics of Grammatical Discrete Structures,” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 13, pp. 241–251.
Chang,  K.-H., and Tang,  P.-S., 2001, “Integration of Design and Manufacturing for Structural Shape Optimization,” Adv. Eng. Software, 32(7), pp. 555–567.
Johanson,  R., Kikuchi,  N., and Papalambros,  P., 1994, “Simultaneous Topology and Material Microstructure Design,”Advances in Structural Optimization, B. H. V. Topping and M. Papadrakakis (ed.), Civil-Comp Ltd., Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 143–149.
Jiang,  T., and Chirehdast,  M., 1997, “A Systems Approach to Structural Topology Optimization: Designing Optimal Connections,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 119, pp. 40–47.
Chickermane,  H., and Gea,  H. C., 1997, “Design of Multi-Component Structural Systems for Optimal Layout Topology and Joint Locations,” Eng. Comput., 13, pp. 235–243.
Li,  Q., Steven,  G. P., and Xie,  Y. M., 2001, “Evolutionary Structural Optimization for Connection Topology Design of Multi-Component Systems,” Engineering Computations, 18(3/4), pp. 460–479.
Eng,  T.-H., Ling,  Z.-K., Olson,  W., and McLean,  C., 1999, “Feature-based Assembly Modeling and Sequence Generation,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, 36(1) , pp. 17–33.
van Holland,  W., and Bronsvoort,  W. F., 2000, “Assembly Features in Modeling and Planning,” Rob. Comput.-Integr. Manufact., 16(4), pp. 277–294.
Wang,  C.-H., and Bourne,  D. A., 1997, “Design and Manufacturing of Sheet Metal Parts: Using Features to Aid Process Planning and Resolve Manufacturability Problems,” Rob. Comput.-Integr. Manufact., 13(3), pp. 281–294.
Whitney,  D. E., Mantripragada,  R., Adams,  J. D., and Rhee,  S. J., 1999, “Designing Assemblies,” Res. Eng. Des., 11(4), pp. 228–253.
Senin,  N., Groppetti,  R., and Wallace,  D. R., 2000, “Concurrent Assembly Planning with Genetic Algorithms,” International Journal of Product Design and Process Development, 16(1), pp. 65–72.
Lazzerini,  B., and Marcelloni,  F., 2000, “A Genetic Algorithm for Generating Optimal Assembly Plans,” Artif. Intell. Eng., 14(4), pp. 319–329.
Stake, R. B., 1999, “A Hierarchical Classification of the Reasons for Dividing Products into Modules-A Theoretical Analysis,” Licentiate thesis, Department of Manufacturing Systems, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.
Ishii, K., 1998, “The Life-cycle of an Enterprise,” A. Molina, J. M. Sanchez, and A. Kusiak, eds., Handbook of Life-cycle Engineering, Kluwer Academic Publishers & Chapman and Hall, London ISBN: 0-412812509.
He,  D., Kusiak,  A., and Tseng,  T. L., 1998, “Delayed Product Differentiation: A Design and Manufacturing Perspective,” Comput.-Aided Des., 30(2), pp. 105–113.
Conner, C. G., De Kroon, J. P., and Mistree, F., 1999, “A Product Variety Tradeoff Evaluation Method for a Family of Cordless Drill Transmissions,” Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC99/DAC-8625, Las Vegas, Nevada, September 12–15.
Newcomb,  P. J., Bras,  B. A., and Rosen,  D. W., 1998, “Implications of Modularity on Product Design for the Life Cycle,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 120(3), pp. 483–490.
Kota,  S., Sethuraman,  K., and Miller,  R., 2000, “A Metric for Evaluating Design Commonality in Product Families,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 122(4), pp. 403–410.
Yu,  J. S., Gonzalez-Zugasti,  J. P., and Otto,  K. N., 1999, “Product Architecture Definition Based Upon Customer Demands,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(3), pp. 329–335.
Nelson,  S., Parkinson,  M. B., and Papalambros,  P. Y., 2001, “Multicriteria Optimization in Product Platform Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 199–204.
Fujita, K., Sakaguchi, H., and Akagi, S., 1999, “Product Variety Deployment and Its Optimization under Modular Architecture and Module Commonalization,” Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC99/DFM-8923, Las Vegas, Nevada, September 12–15.
van Vliet, J. W., van Luttervelt, C. A., and Kals, H. J. J., 1999, “State-of-the-art Report On Design for Manufacturing,” Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, DETC99/DFM-8970, Las Vegas, Nevada, September 12–15.
Yao,  Z., Bradley,  H. D., and Maropoulos,  P. G., 1998, “An Aggregate Weld Product Model for the Early Design Stages,” Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 12(5), pp. 447–461.
Hahn,  O., Gieske,  D., Klasfauseweh,  U., and Rohde,  A., 1997, “Fatigue Resistance of Spot Welds under Multiaxial Loads,” Weld. World, 37(5), pp. 15–22.
Sigmund,  O., 2001, “A 99 Line Topology Optimization Code Written in Matlab,” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 21, pp. 120–127.
Garey, M. R., and Johnson, D. S., 1979, Computers and Intractability, A Guide to the Theory of NP-completeness, W. H. Freeman and Co. New York.
Davis, L., 1991, Handbook of Genetic Algorithms, Van Nostrand, Reinhold, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
The design problems to be addressed simultaneously
Grahic Jump Location
Optimum topologies for the design problems
Grahic Jump Location
Graph representation for problem 1
Grahic Jump Location
First half of chromosome with binary information
Grahic Jump Location
Second half of chromosome with mating angle information
Grahic Jump Location
Possible mating angles at the joints
Grahic Jump Location
Crossover of two chromosomes
Grahic Jump Location
The minima for the sample problem. The components marked with “s” are shared among the products.
Grahic Jump Location
Decompositions when only structural measures are used
Grahic Jump Location
Ideal angles calculated for the joints using the results of the finite element analysis
Grahic Jump Location
Stress distributions for the sample problem. Maximum stresses are 600 MPa and 500 MPa respectively for the two structures. Stress increases from dark to light regions.
Grahic Jump Location
Bicycle frame model modified from Chirehdast et al., 6
Grahic Jump Location
Loads and boundary conditions for the first frame
Grahic Jump Location
Loads and boundary conditions for the second frame. Application point of the (1000 N, 140 N) load is slightly changed compared to Fig. 13.
Grahic Jump Location
Stress distributions for the frames. Maximum stresses are 170 MPa and 100 MPa respectively for the two structures. Stress increases from dark to light regions.
Grahic Jump Location
Ideal joint angles for the frames
Grahic Jump Location
Decomposition of frame 1 when only structural measures are used, i.e., w5=w6=0.
Grahic Jump Location
Decomposition of frame 2 when only structural measures are used. a) and b) are two alternative decompositions with close cost values.
Grahic Jump Location
Decomposition of the frames for modularity. The components marked with “s” are shared among the products.
Grahic Jump Location
Optimization history of a typical GA run for the bicycle design example for each objective function term: (a) fs(x1,y1), (b) fs(x2,y2), and (c) number of modules. The values shown in the plots are of the best individual for each generation.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In