Research Papers

High-Stiffness, Lock-and-Key Heat-Reversible Locator-Snap Systems for the Design for Disassembly

[+] Author and Article Information
Mohammed Shalaby

 General Electric-Global Research Center, 1 Research Circle, Niskayuna, NY 12309shalaby@ge.com

Kazuhiro Saitou

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125kazu@umich.edu

J. Mech. Des 131(4), 041005 (Mar 23, 2009) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3087529 History: Received August 10, 2008; Revised December 24, 2008; Published March 23, 2009

Driven by the moral sense of obligation, legislative and social pressures, manufacturers now consider effective part reuse and material recycling at the end of product life at the design stage. It is a key consideration to use joints that can disengage with minimum labor, part damage, and material contamination. This paper extends our previous work on the design of high-stiffness reversible locator-snap system that can disengage nondestructively with localized heat (Shalaby and Saitou, 2006, “Optimal Heat-Reversible Snap Joints for Frame-Panel Assembly in Aluminum Space Frame Automotive Bodies,” Proceedings of the LCE2006: The 13th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Leuven, Belgium, May 31–Jun. 2, pp. 411–416; Shalaby and Saitou, 2008, “Design for Disassembly With High-Stiffness, Heat-Reversible Locator-Snap Systems,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 130(12), p. 121701) to include (1) modeling for tolerance stack-up and (2) lock-and-key concept to ensure that snaps only disengage when the right procedure is followed. The design problem is posed as an optimization problem to find the locations, numbers, and orientations of locators and snaps, and the locations and sizes of heating areas, to release the snaps with minimum heat, compliance, and tolerance stack-up. The motion and structural requirements are considered constraints. Screw theory is employed to precalculate the set of feasible types and orientations of locators and snaps that are examined during optimization. Multi-objective genetic algorithm coupled with structural and thermal finite element analysis is used to solve the optimization problem. The method is applied on two case studies. The Pareto-optimal solutions present alternative designs with different trade-offs between the design objectives.

Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Assembly and disassembly of heat-reversible snap: (a) before assembly, (b) push, (c) lock, (d) heat, (e) pull apart, and (f) unlock

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Double-latch snap: (a) locked, (b) unlocked, and ((c) and (d)) insufficient and excessive unlocking displacement, respectively

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Part geometry, coordinates of vertices of mating polygon, and feasible region for heating and ((b)–(e)) locators and snaps in library

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Example of feasible locator/snap orientations

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Tolerance stack-up example: (a) ideal case and response to dimensional variations, (b) v1 for a locator at a distance d1, and (c) v1 for a locator at a distance d2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Examples double-latching snap attachments with snaps attached to part B: part A bulges outward when heated ((a) and (b)) and part A bulging inward when heated ((c) and (d))

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Flowchart of the NSGA-II (30)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Geometric crossover: (a) parent p1, (b) parent p2, (c) child c1, and (d) child c2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Simplified model of the rhombus enclosure casing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

(a) CAD model for the lower enclosure only with the four sides of the rhombus numbered S1,…,S4 and (b) flattened 2D surfaces of the rhombus

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

3D Pareto front for the case study

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Optimum solution with minimum heat/cool area

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

CAD drawing for the solution with minimum heat/cool area

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Optimum solution with maximum distance between locators constraining same DOFs

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

CAD drawing for the solution with maximum distance between locators constraining same DOFs

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Simplified model of a flat panel TV: (a) front bezel, (b) steel frame with LCD screen, and (c) rear panel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

TV front enclosure with apparent edges highlighted

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Front view of the front TV bezel two heating areas identified using polar coordinates

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Measuring locator and snap stiffness: (a) z-direction constraining locator and snap, (b) y-direction constraining locator, and (c) x-direction constraining locator

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Spider-web diagram for Pareto-optimal solutions

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Solution with minimum local heat/cool area

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Schematic CAD drawing for the solution with minimum local heat/cool area

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Solution with maximum distance between locators that constrain the same DOF

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Schematic CAD drawing for solution with maximum distance between locators that constrain the same DOF




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