0
Research Papers: Design for Manufacture and the Life Cycle

Automatic Reasoning for Defining Lathe Operations for Mill-Turn Parts: A Tolerance Based Approach

[+] Author and Article Information
Wentao Fu

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: wentao.fu@mail.utexas.edu; fu_wentao@cat.com

Ata A. Eftekharian

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, TX 78712
e-mail: ata.eftekharian@gmail.com

Matthew I. Campbell

School of Mechanical, Industrial, and
Manufacturing Engineering,
Oregon State University,
Corvallis, OR 97331-6001
e-mail: matt.campbell@oregonstate.edu

Tolga Kurtoglu

Automation for Engineered Systems,
Intelligent Systems Laboratory,
Palo Alto Research Center,
Palo Alto, CA 94304
e-mail: tolga.kurtoglu@parc.com

All experiments in this paper were implemented on a desktop computer with AMD 3.2 GHz processor and 6 GB of memory.

1Corresponding author.

2Present address: Caterpillar Inc., 1901 S 1st St, Champaign, IL, U.S. 61820.

Contributed by the Design for Manufacturing Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received October 17, 2013; final manuscript received August 4, 2014; published online October 20, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Rikard Söderberg.

J. Mech. Des 136(12), 121701 (Oct 20, 2014) (10 pages) Paper No: MD-13-1468; doi: 10.1115/1.4028275 History: Received October 17, 2013; Revised August 04, 2014

With the increase in computer-controlled hybrid machining (e.g., mill-turn machining), one needs to discern what features of a part are created during turning (i.e., with a lathe cutter) versus those created by milling. Given a generic part, it is desirable to extract the turnable and nonturnable features in order to obtain feasible machining plans. A novel approach for automating this division and for defining the resulting turning operations in a hybrid process is proposed in this paper. Given a mill-turn part, the algorithm first identifies the dominant rotational-axis in order to quickly generate the axisymmetric “as-lathed” model. This model is then subtracted from the original part to isolate the nonturnable features. Next, the as-lathed model is translated to a label-rich graph, which is fed into a grammar reasoning algorithm to produce feasible turning sequences. During the turning process planning, the knowledge encapsulated in the design tolerances is used to guide the generation of feasible turning sequences. Two case studies are provided to explain the details of our algorithm. One of the suggested turning plans is compared with a manually proposed plan from an expert machinist and the results show the optimality of our plan in satisfying the prescribed tolerances.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Fu, W., Eftekharian, A., Radhakrishnan, P., Campbell, M., and Fritz, C., 2012, “A Graph Grammar Based Approach to Automated Manufacturing Planning,” ASME IDETC/CIE, Chicago, IL, Aug 12–15, p. 512. [CrossRef]
Fu, W., Eftekharian, A. A., and Campbell, M. I., 2013, “Automated Manufacturing Planning Approach Based on Volume decomposition and Graph-Grammars,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 13(2), p. 021010. [CrossRef]
Eftekharian, A., and Campbell, M. I., 2012, “Convex Decomposition of 3D Solid Models for Automated Manufacturing Process Planning Applications,” ASME IDETC/CIE, Chicago, IL, Aug 12–15. [CrossRef]
Tseng, Y.-J., and Joshi, S. B., 1998, “Recognition of Interacting Rotational and Prismatic Machining Features From 3-D Mill-Turn Parts,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 36(11), pp. 3147–3165. [CrossRef]
Waco, D. L., and Kim, Y. S., 1994, “Machining Feature Reasoning Using Convex Decomposition,” Adv. Eng. Software, 20(2–3), pp. 107–119. [CrossRef]
Berra, P. B., and Barash, M. M., 1968, “Automatic Process Planning and Optimization for a Turning Operation,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 7(2), pp. 93–103. [CrossRef]
Lai-Yuen, S. K., and Lee, Y.-S., 2002, “Turn-Mill Tool Path Planning and Manufacturing Cost Analysis for Complex Parts Machining,” Industrial Engineering Research (IERC) Conference, Orlando, FL.
Zhang, X., Liu, R., Nassehi, A., and Newman, S. T., 2011, “A STEP-Compliant Process Planning System for CNC Turning Operations,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf., 27(2), pp. 349–356. [CrossRef]
Huang, S., Liu, D., and Wang, B., 2009, “Research on Lathe Automatic Design System,” 2009 International Conference on Management and Service Science, Wuhan, China, Sept. 20–22, pp. 1–4.
Culler, D. E., 1994, “The Turning Assistant: Automated Planning for Numerical Control Lathe Operations,” ProQuest dissertation and theses (PQDT), University: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM.
Liu, S., 2004, “Feature Extraction and Classification for Rotational Parts Taking 3D Data Files as Input,” J. Chin. Inst. Ind. Eng., 21(5), pp. 432–443. [CrossRef]
Suliman, S., and. Awan, K., 2001, “Automatic Recognition of Turning Features Using 2-D Drawing Files.,” JSME Int. J. Ser. C, 44(2), pp. 527–533. [CrossRef]
Li, S., and Shah, J. J., 2007, “Recognition of User-Defined Turning Features for Mill/Turn Parts,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(3), pp. 225–235. [CrossRef]
Shen, Z., Ameta, G., Shah, J. J., and Davidson, J. K., 2005, “A Comparative Study of Tolerance Analysis Methods,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 5(3), pp. 247–256. [CrossRef]
Salomons, O. W., Poerink, H. J., Van Slooten, F., Van Houten, F. J. A. M., and Kals, H. J. J., 1996, “A tolerancing tool based on kinematic analogies. In Computer-aided Tolerancing,” Springer Netherlands, pp. 47–70.
Gao, J., Chase, K. W., and Magleby, S. P., 1998, “Generalized 3-D Tolerance Analysis of Mechanical Assemblies With Small Kinematic Adjustments,” IIE Trans., 30(4), pp. 367–377. [CrossRef]
Caux, M., and Anselmetti, B., 2011, “3D ISO Manufacturing Specifications With Vectorial Representation of Tolerance Zones,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 60(5–8), pp. 577–588. [CrossRef]
Ameta, G., Davidson, J. K., and Shah, J. J., 2007, “Tolerance-Maps Applied to a Point-Line Cluster of Features,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(8), pp. 782–792. [CrossRef]
Ameta, G., Davidson, J. K., and Shah, J. J., 2007, “Using Tolerance-Maps to Generate Frequency Distributions of Clearance and Allocate Tolerances for Pin-Hole Assemblies,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(4), pp. 347–359. [CrossRef]
Huang, S. H., Liu, Q., and Musa, R., 2004, “Tolerance-Based Process Plan Evaluation Using Monte Carlo Simulation,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 42(23), pp. 4871–4891. [CrossRef]
Khan, Nadeem Shafi. “Generalized Statistical Tolerance Analysis And Three Dimensional Model For Manufacturing Tolerance Transfer in Manufacturing Process Planning.” PhD diss., Arizona State University, 2011.
Hamou, S., Cheikh, A., Linares, J. M., and Daho, A. C., 2006, “A Stochastic Concept for the Optimization of Manufacturing Tolerances in Computer Aided Process Plan Simulation,” Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf., 19(7), pp. 663–675. [CrossRef]
Sobh, T. M., Henderson, T. C., and Zana, F., 1999, “Tolerance Representation and Analysis in Industrial Inspection,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst., 24(4), pp. 387–401. [CrossRef]
Desrochers, A., and Rivibret, A., 1997, “A Matrix Approach to the Representation of Tolerance Zone and Clearances,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 13(9), pp. 630–636. [CrossRef]
Mujezinović, A., Davidson, J. K., and Shah, J. J., 2004, “A New Mathematical Model for Geometric Tolerances as Applied to Polygonal Faces,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 126(3), pp. 504–518. [CrossRef]
Carrino, L., Moroni, G., Polini, W., and Semeraro, Q., 2003, “Machining Planning for Tolerance Synthesis,” Mach. Sci. Technol., 7(3), pp. 333–347. [CrossRef]
Huang, S. H., Zhang, H. C., and Oldham, W. J. B., 1997, “Tolerance Analysis for Setup Planning: A Graph Theoretical Approach,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 35(4), pp. 1107–1124. [CrossRef]
Campbell, M. I., 2012, “GRAPHSYNTH2: Software for Generative Grammars and Creative Search,” https://bitbucket.org/MattCampbell/graphsynth
Liu, Q., and Huang, S., 2003, “Rigorous Application of Tolerance Analysis in Setup Planning,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 21(3), pp. 196–207. [CrossRef]
Parasolid: 3D Geometric Modeling Engine, 2012, Siemens. Available at: http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_us/products/open/parasolid/
Fu, W., Nelaturi, S., Rangarajan, A., and Kurtoglu, T., 2014, “Tolerance Analysis for Validating Manufacturing Process Plans,” Proceedings of the ASME 2014 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (IDETC/CIE2014-34329), Buffalo, NY, Aug 17–20.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A sample part with nonturnable features

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) The identified curved edges and (b) their axial normal vectors for the part in Fig. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

A unit circle with nonuniform radial vectors

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) The sampled cross sections of the part in Fig. 1 and (b) the union of all the cross sections

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) The revolving face and the rotational axis and (b) the as-lathed model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) The decomposed turnable features and (b) nonturnable features

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

A test summary of more complex parts

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Graph grammar reasoning flowchart

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The CAD drawing of the part shown in Fig. 5(b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

The tolerance graph generated from the 2D drawing in Fig. 9

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The generalized angle α of the parallelism tolerance

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

The screenshot of the first rule

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

The screenshot of the setup graph

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

The suggested turning sequence for the part shown in Fig. 5(b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

A complex part with interacting feature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

The CAD drawing of the as-lathed model in Fig. 15(a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

The initial tolerance graph for the part shown in Fig. 15(a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

The updated tolerance graph for the part shown in Fig. 15(a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

The setup graph for the part in Fig. 15(a). The internal arcs a5 and a6 are deleted.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

The suggested turning sequence for the part shown in Fig. 15(a)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

A traditional turning sequence for the part shown in Fig. 5(b)

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